Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 17, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Rashid And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 July, 2025





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:126680
 
Court No. - 76
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35412 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Rashid And 5 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Jaiswal,Mayank Mishra,Yogendra Pal Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,J.B. Singh,Rahul Singh Tomar
 
With
 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35416 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Faizab And 5 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- J.B. Singh,Yogendra Pal Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anil Kumar Jaiswal,Mayank Mishra,Rahul Singh Tomar
 
With
 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35462 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Rashid And 5 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Jaiswal,Mayank Mishra,Yogendra Pal Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,J.B. Singh,Rahul Singh Tomar
 
With
 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35478 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Faizab And 8 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- J.B. Singh,Yogendra Pal Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anil Kumar Jaiswal,G.A.,Mayank Mishra,Rahul Singh Tomar 
 

 
Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rahul Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The application U/s 482 No. - 35412 of 2023 has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 953 of 2022 (State Vs. Sherdin & others) arising out of Case Crime No. 523 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 336, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kharkhaunda, District Meerut as well as impugned charge sheet dated 4.11.2020 against the applicants on the basis of compromise.

3. The application U/s 482 No. 35416 of 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 14655 of 2021 (State Vs. Danish and others) arising out of Case Crime No., 517 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 336, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Kharkhaunda, District Meerut as well as impugned charge sheet dated 4.11.2020 against the applicants on the basis of compromise.

4. The application U/s 482 No. 35416 of 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 14655 of 2021 (State Vs. Danish and others) arising out of Case Crime No., 517 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 336, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Kharkhaunda, District Meerut as well as impugned charge sheet dated 4.11.2020 against the applicants on the basis of compromise.

5. The application U/s 482 No. 35462 of 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 9984 of 2020 (State Vs. Rashid and others) arising out of Case Crime No., 1084 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 341, 352, 325, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kharkhaunda, District Meerut as well as impugned charge sheet dated 17.09.2019 against the applicants on the basis of compromise.

6. The application U/s 482 No. 35478 of 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 10281 of 2020 (State Vs. Javed and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 346 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 506, 308 IPC, Police Station Kharkhaunda, District Meerut as well as impugned charge sheet dated 23.09.2019 against the applicants on the basis of compromise.

7. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 27.04.2023 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 16.11.2023, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

8. Learned 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.

9. 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.

10. 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 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.

11. 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.

12. 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 27.04.2024, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

13. 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.

14. The present application is, accordingly, allowed.

Order Date :- 29.7.2025 Kumar Manish