Allahabad High Court

MOHAN AND 7 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 23 September 2026
Bench: SAMIT GOPAL

Holding

Where the parties have amicably settled the dispute and the settlement is verified by the trial court, the criminal proceedings may be quashed under Section 482 of the CrPC.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 6950 of 2020) arising from offences under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 of the IPC. The parties had reached an out‑of‑court settlement, which was verified by the trial court on 22 January 2024. The opposite party affirmed that it would not pursue the matter or produce evidence against the applicants. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow quashing of cases where the dispute is settled, the High Court held that the proceedings, charge sheet and cognizance order could be set aside. Consequently, the application was allowed and the criminal proceedings were quashed.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal case can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC on the basis of a settlement/compromise between the parties.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307

Subjects

settlement
compromise
quash criminal proceedings
Section 482 CrPC
IPC sections 147 148 149 307
High Court of Allahabad
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46377 of 2023

Mohan And 7 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dalvir Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Raj Narayan Gupta

Court No. - 76
HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Dalvir Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri
Raj Narayan Gupta, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2,
Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and
perused the records.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been
filed by the applicants- Mohan, Ajay@Karu, Ram Lakhan,
Rameshwar, Veer Bahadur,Dafedar Singh, Pintu@Arjun and
Satendra with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings
of Case No. 6950 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No.188 of
2014, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 I.P.C., Police Station-
Naya Gaon, District Etah, along with charge sheet dated
28.1.2015, cognizance order dated 10.08.2015, pending before the
Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No. 22, Etah with the further
prayer to stay the further proceedings of the said case during
pendency of this application.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the parties have
settled the dispute amicably out of court and on the basis of
compromise the applicants filed the present application in which an
order for verification of the compromise was passed on 4.1.2024.
It is argued that in compliance of the order dated 4.1.2024 the
A482 No. 46377 of 2023
2

parties have filed the order of this Court along with the said
compromise deed before the concerned court for verification of the
same, after which the concerned court has verified the said
compromise vide its order dated 22.1.2024, copy of the said order
is annexure no. S.A.-2 to the supplementary affidavit dated
14.2.2024. It is submitted that criminal history of the applicant no. 1
Mohan@Abhay Pratap, has been disclosed and explained in para-
12 of the rejoinder affidavit dated 23.11.2025, which is on record.
It is argued that the opposite party no. 2 is not interested to pursue
the matter pending in the trial court and is not inclined to give any
evidence against the applicants and therefore the impugned
proceedings be quashed on the ground of compromise between
the parties.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned
A.G.A. could not dispute the fact that the matter has been amicably
settled between the parties which was duly verified by the
concerned trial court.

6. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of
settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex
Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of
Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs.
Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj
Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh
Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and
others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and
(6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and
others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has
held that the cases in which the parties have settled their
grievances can be quashed.

7. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex
Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for
exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings, charge
sheet, cognizance order as prayed for by the applicant(s).
A482 No. 46377 of 2023
3

8. The present application is allowed.

9. The impugned cognizance order, charge sheet and the
proceedings of the said case are hereby quashed.

10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(Samit Gopal,J.)

September 24, 2026
Naresh

Digitally signed by :-
NARESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…