Allahabad High Court
SHRI KRISHNA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The High Court held that the criminal proceedings must be quashed as the parties have settled the dispute and continuation would constitute an abuse of process.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash Special Session Trial No. 474 of 2024 in which they were summoned under IPC sections 323/149, 392/149, 394/149 and 395/149. They asserted that a compromise between the parties was entered on 4 August 2025 and was verified by the trial court on 30 March 2026. Opposite Party No. 2 did not dispute these facts and also expressed that it did not wish to continue the criminal case. The Court examined whether continuation of the proceedings after a verified settlement would amount to an abuse of process and relied on established Supreme Court jurisprudence permitting quash in such circumstances. Finding that no useful purpose would be served by proceeding, the Court allowed the application and quashed the entire criminal proceeding.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding under Sections 323, 392, 394 and 395 IPC can be quashed on the ground of a verified compromise between the parties.
- Whether the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to prevent abuse of process in such cases.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 482 CrPC
- inherent jurisdiction
- compromise settlement
- abuse of process
- IPC offences
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 20591 of 2025
Shri Krishna Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashutosh Vishwakarma, Gaurav Kumar
Chaturvedi, Ram Kumar Malviya,
Sudhir Singh Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Lavkush Kumar Bhatt
Court No. - 81
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is taken
on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused
the material available on record.
3. The applicants by means of present application have invoked the
inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the entire
proceedings of Special Session Trial No. 474 of 2024 (State vs. Nagesh
Kumar Upadhyay and others) in pursuance of summoning order dated
7.9.2024 passed by learned Special Judge Dacoity Affected
Area/Additional Sessions Judge-III, Farrukhabad in Complaint Case No.
125 of 2017 (Vijay Kumar Sharma vs. S.O. Nagesh), wherein the
applicants have been summoned to face the trial under Sections 323/149,
392/149, 394/149 and 395/149 I.P.C.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has
already been entered between the parties on 4.8.2025 and the same has
been verified by the court concerned on 30.3.2026, therefore, the present
case be decided finally. The said compromise verification order has been
filed as Annexure-SA1 to the supplementary affidavit.
5. Learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 has not disputed the
NA528 No. 20591 of 2025
2
facts, as stated by learned counsel for the applicants. He further contended
that, opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case
against the applicants and the same may be quashed.
6. It would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with
the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would
tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise
between the parties and to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that
the criminal case is put to an end.
7. In view of the fact that, the parties do not want to pursue the case any
further, as stated by them and the fact that matter has been mutually
settled between the parties in view of the compromise dated 4.8.2025, no
useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.
8. Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir 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 Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, summoning order dated
7.9.2024 passed by learned Special Judge Dacoity Affected
Area/Additional Sessions Judge-III, Farrukhabad and well as the entire
proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
9. The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, is, accordingly, allowed.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
May 14, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…