Allahabad High Court
ZAHEER @ JAHIR AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The High Court held that, in view of the parties' settlement and the lack of any useful purpose in continuing the case, the proceedings were to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a charge sheet and the entire criminal proceeding arising from offences under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC. The applicants and the second opposite party had amicably settled the dispute outside court and the second opposite party expressed a willingness to withdraw the prosecution. Both parties, as well as the Assistant Government Advocate, affirmed that there was no longer any dispute to be adjudicated. The Court referred to Supreme Court precedents allowing compromise even in certain cognizable and non‑compoundable offences. Considering that continuation of the case would serve no useful purpose, the High Court quashed the proceedings against the applicants and allowed the Section 482 application.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. when the parties have reached a compromise in offences under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- quash of criminal proceedings
- non‑compoundable offences
- settlement
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46285 of 2019
Zaheer @ Jahir And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Balbeer Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Manish Jaiswal
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Balbeer
Singh, learned counsel for applicants, Sri Manish Jaiswal, learned counsel
for opposite party No.2 and learned AGA for the State.
3. The present application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by
the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge sheet No.459 of 2015 dated
18.9.2015, cognizance order dated 3.5.2016 and entire proceeding of Crl.
Case No.276 of 2016 (State Vs. Jameer & Ors.), arising out of Case Crime
No.584 of 2015, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Tajganj, District
Agra.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite
party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicants
approached this Court by filing this application with prayer to quash the
proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, this Court
vide order dated 14.1.2020 directed the parties to appear before the trial
court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court
vide order dated 11.2.2020 verified the parties as well as compromise
application. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2
compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed
the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and
opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their dispute and as
such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the
applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the
applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be
served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the
A482 No. 46285 of 2019
2
correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or
the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that
opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case
are quashed.
6. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out
of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.
7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs.
State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs.
State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab
(2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5
SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that
compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain
cognizable and non-compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to
the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P.
and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein
above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this
Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by
prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.
9. Accordingly, the proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed in
respect of present applicants.
10. This application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed
.
October 1, 2026
Md Faisal
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…