Ameer Babar and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24737 of 2025 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

¶1List has been revised. No one appears on behalf of the applicant. Heard learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶2This application has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No.364 of 2021 and charge sheet dated 28.4.2018 and cognizance order dated 30.5.2018 in Case Crime No.0593 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Amroha Nagar, District Amroha pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/Fast Track Court 1st, Amroha.

¶3From perusal of the record the Court finds that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 14.5.2018 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 19.8.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶4Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has not disputed the 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.

¶5Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement which is duly verified by the court concerned. It is further submitted that he would have no objection in case criminal proceedings are put to an end. He further submits that in view of settlement there is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Irshad Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ameer Babar And 4 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) virtually no chance of any conviction being recorded in the criminal proceedings.

¶6Having examined the matter in its totality, this Court is of the view that the criminal proceedings in the present case had essentially been an outcome of a matrimonial dispute; and there are no such over bearing circumstances for which the applicants ought to be prosecuted even after the parties has entered into a settlement. Needless to observe that with the present stand of the parties in terms of their settlement, there is practically no chance of recording conviction, even if the case under the F.I.R. in question is put to trial. In other words, entire exercise of trial would only be an exercise in futility. On the contrary, looking to the nature of dispute and the fact that the disputants have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings in question are quashed.

¶7It 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 victim and the wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end.

¶8In 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 14.5.2018, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶9Thus, 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, the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

¶10The present application is, accordingly, allowed. September 26, 2025 Bhaskar NA528 No. 24737 of 2025 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad