Allahabad High Court
AHASHAN AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The Court held that, in view of the parties' settlement and lack of any useful purpose in continuing the case, the proceedings could be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Summary
The applicants, Ahashan and three others, filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet and proceedings in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506 IPC. The applicants and the second opposite party had amicably settled their dispute outside court and the second opposite party expressed no desire to continue the prosecution. The High Court examined precedent that permits compromise even in certain cognizable and non‑compoundable offences, citing several Supreme Court decisions. Considering that the settlement rendered the continuation of the case purposeless, the Court held that the proceedings should be terminated. Accordingly, the application under Section 482 was allowed and the criminal proceedings against the applicants were quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether a High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC when the parties have reached a compromise, even if the offences are cognizable and non‑compoundable.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 324, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- Section 482 CrPC
- quash of criminal proceedings
- non‑compoundable offence
- settlement
- High Court jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46287 of 2019
Ahashan And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manish Jaiswal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Balbeer Singh, G.A.
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.372 of 2015 dated
23.8.2015, cognizance order dated 4.1.2016 and entire proceeding of Crl.
Case No.2 of 2016 (State Vs. Ahashan & others), arising out of Case Crime
No.482 of 2015, under Sections 323, 324, 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. 46287 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…