Allahabad High Court

RAJ BAHADURversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 3 May 2026
Bench: VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL

Holding

The appeal was disposed of in terms of the compromise, resulting in the appellant's acquittal.

Summary

In Criminal Appeal No. 849 of 2001 (Raj Bahadur v. State of U.P.), the appellant and the State agreed to settle the dispute out of court and filed a joint affidavit evidencing a compromise between the appellant, the informant Punjab Singh, and the injured witness Rampati. The High Court, after verifying the compromise through the Chief Judicial Magistrate, considered the provisions of Section 320 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which permits composition of certain offences at the instance of the injured. Since the offence involved was under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, the court held that the compromise was permissible. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of on the basis of the compromise, the appellant was acquitted, his bail bond and sureties were discharged, and the trial court record was ordered to be sent back.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal appeal involving an offence under Section 326 IPC can be disposed of on the basis of a compromise under Section 320 CrPC.
Whether the court may accept a compromise after verification by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 320
Indian Penal Code — s. 326

Subjects

compromise
composition of offence
Section 326 IPC
criminal appeal
acquittal
bail discharge

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 849 of 2001

Raj Bahadur
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ajay Dubey, Ajay Kumar Sharma, Atul
Sharma, Kamini Dubey, Shyam Sunder
Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Arvind Kumar, Govt. Advocate

Court No. - 93
HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.

1. Heard Sri Shyam Sunder Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri
Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party and Sri Rahul
Asthana, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that during the pendency of this
appeal parties have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court and filed a
joint affidavit, which on record. It is further submitted that on the basis of
compromise a joint compromise affidavit on notary was prepared between
the deponent no.1 and deponent no.2 and 3, mentioning therein that both the
parties are agreed to decide the Criminal Appeal No.849 of 2001 (Raj
Bahadur vs. State of U.P.) on the basis of compromise and they do not want
any proceeding against the appellant. An original joint notary affidavit of the
appellant and the first informant namely Punjab Singh and injured witness
namely Rampati reference in this regard is made to Annexure No.1 to the
joint affidavit.

3. Learned counsel for the opposite party also states that the matter has been
amicably settled between the parties and that the opposite party does not
want to proceed further with the matter.

4. Learned A.G.A. has no objection in this regard.
CRLA No. 849 of 2001
2

5. From the perusal of joint affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant and first
informant namely Punjab Singh and injured witness namely Rampati, it
appears that the injured has agreed not to proceed with the case and has
settled their dispute amicably with the appellant and there is joint request to
decide the appeal in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties.

6. Vide order dated 16.10.2025 passed by this Court learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate concerned was directed to verify the contents of the said
compromise/joint affidavit. Pursuant to order dated 16.10.2025 learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra had verified the contents of the said
compromise/joint affidavit vide order dated 27.11.2025, a copy of said order
is available on record.

7. In the considered opinion of this Court, since the parties have entered into
compromise and in the scheme of Section 320 Cr. P.C., the composition of
the offence is permissible between the parties at the instance of the injured,
therefore, this appeal is decided in terms of compromise as entered into
between the parties.

8. Thus, this appeal is disposed of in terms of compromise entered into
between the parties and the appellants stand acquitted of the charge under
Section 326 I.P.C. The appellant is on bail, he need not to surrender. His
personal bond and sureties are discharged.

9. Trial Court record be sent back.
May 4, 2026
Dev
(Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
DEV PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…