Allahabad High Court
SANT LAL VISHWAKARMA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the earlier judgment is quashed on the basis of a valid, court‑verified compromise between the parties.
Summary
The appellants, Sant Lal Vishwakarma and others, appealed against a conviction under IPC sections 323, 325, 504 and 506 handed down by the Additional Session Judge, Allahabad. Both parties later entered into a compromise settlement, which was verified by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on 17‑12‑2021. The appellants contended that the compromise was voluntary and free of coercion. The High Court examined whether a compromise is permissible for the offences involved and found that the settlement, having been duly verified, satisfied the legal requirements. Consequently, the Court quashed the earlier judgment and allowed the criminal appeal in accordance with the compromise.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between the parties can extinguish criminal liability for offences under IPC sections 323, 325, 504 and 506.
- Whether the compromise was made voluntarily without coercion or undue influence.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 325, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- criminal appeal
- quash judgment
- IPC sections 323 325 504 506
- settlement
- Allahabad High Court
- voluntary consent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1733 of 2011
Sant Lal Vishwakarma And Others
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Dhananjay Singh, Shri Ram (Rawat)
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Agnivesh, Govt. Advocate, Jadu Nandan
Yadav
Court No. - 92
HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.
1. Heard Ms. Safia, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Shri Ram Rawat,
learned counsel for the appellants; Sri Shashank Sharma, learned counsel
holding brief of Sri Jadu Nandan Sharma, learned counsel for opposite party
no. 2 and Sri Rahul Asthana, learned A.G.A. for the State respondent.
2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgement and order dated
23.2.2011 passed by learned Additional Session Judge/F.T.C. No.26, District
Allahabad in Session Trial No.111 of 2006 arising out of Case Crime No.90
of 2003 (State vs. Sant Lal and others), under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506
I.P.C., P.S. Sarai Mamrej, District Allahabad.
3. The parties before this Court have made a request that they have entered
into a compromise in this matter and have settled all the disputes between
them and now they do not want to proceed with this matter. It is further
submitted that in compliance of the order of this Court dated 28.10.2021, the
compromise deed submitted by the parties has been verified by the learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7 Allahabad. Further record
discloses that verification report dated 17.12.2021 has also been received,
which is on record wherein it is mentioned that the first party Ranjay Singh
son of Hit Karan Singh, Arvind Singh son of Yogendra Singh, Jogendra
Singh son of Mata Saran Singh, Bhanu Singh son of Chhatrapal Singh and
Haripal Singh son of Sukhai Singh and the second party Ram Kripal
Vishwakarma son of Dwarika, Shyam Lal Vishwakarma son of Sant Lal and
Dudhnath Vishwakarma son of Sant Lal appeared before me on 16.12.2021.
The settlement/agreement letter was read out and explained to both the
parties, the veracity of which has been accepted by both the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted before this Court that the
CRLA No. 1733 of 2011
2
compromise entered into between the parties has been made without any
coercion or undue influence upon the informant of this case and is a result of
free will and consent of the parties.
5. In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds that since the parties have
entered into compromise which has already been verified by the learned trial
Court, the judgement and order dated 23.2.2011 passed by learned
Additional Session Judge/F.T.C. No.26, District Allahabad in Session Trial
No.111 of 2006 arising out of Case Crime No.90 of 2003 (State vs. Sant Lal
and others), under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Sarai Mamrej,
District Allahabad are hereby quashed and the present criminal appeal is
allowed in terms of compromise entered into between both the parties.
September 29, 2026
Dev
(Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
DEV PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…