Nirmal Singh And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 31 October, 2025

[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Nirmal Singh And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 31 October, 2025

Bench: Saurabh Srivastava





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:192524
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16817 of 2025   
 
   Nirmal Singh And 3 Others    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State of U.P. and Another    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Vijay Kumar, Vinod Kumar   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A., Umesh Chandra Prajapati   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 77
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and Sri Umesh Chandra Prajapati, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA.

2. The present application has been filed to quash chargesheet dated 02.02.2021 along with summoning order dated 15.04.2025 and entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.1037 of 2025 (State Vs. Nirmal and others), arising out of Case Crime No.249 of 2020, under Sections 452, 354, 354-A, 323, 504, 506, 34 IPC, P.S. Todifatehpur, District Jhansi, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Garotha, Jhansi, on the basis of compromise.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants has submitted that compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified by learned court concerned on dated 04.09.2025 which has been appended with this petition, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error if the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise.

5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.

6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties.

7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, chargesheet dated 02.02.2021 along with summoning order dated 15.04.2025 and entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.1037 of 2025 (State Vs. Nirmal and others), arising out of Case Crime No.249 of 2020, under Sections 452, 354, 354-A, 323, 504, 506, 34 IPC, P.S. Todifatehpur, District Jhansi, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Garotha, Jhansi, are hereby quashed.

8. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed.

9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that she has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, she may seek recall of this order by way of filing recall application explaining the reasons.

10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.) October 31, 2025 Vivek Kr.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Allahabad High Court