Allahabad High Court
Anirudh @ Anirudh Yadav And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 26 June, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:100204 Court No. - 68 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22326 of 2025 Applicant :- Anirudh @ Anirudh Yadav And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Neelam Singh Chauhan,Rakesh Kumar Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present application has been filed by applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No. 1261 of 2025 (State vs. Anirudh and others) along with cognizance order dated 10.01.2025 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra as well as Charge sheet No. 266 of 2023 dated 24.09.2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 424 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC & under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in regard to applicant no. 1 and 2, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC and under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act in regard to applicant no. 3and 4, under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 IPC & under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in regard to applicant no. 5 and 6, Police Station- Hariparwat, Police Commissionerate Agra, District- Agra on the basis of verified compromise.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 17.04.2025 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 16.05.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.
4. Learned 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 virtually no chance of any conviction being recorded in the criminal proceedings.
5. Having 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 being the close relatives, have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings in question are 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 victim and the wrongdoer 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 17.04.2025, 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, the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
9. The present application under Section 528 BNSS is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 26.6.2025 Aditya