Allowed¶25

Vinay Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2025A482/11024/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC inherent jurisdiction quashing on compromise/settlement; non-compoundable offences quashed; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; Parbatbhai Ahir (2017) 9 SCC 641; Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani Criminal Appeal No. 3831 of 2025; Sections 323, 387, 427, 504, 506 IPC; Complaint Case No. 152 of 2023; summoning order dated 08.02.2024; Special Judge Dacoity Jalaun at Orai; verified compromise deed dated 30.03.2024; purely civil/private dispute; Allahabad High Court; Nand Prabha Shukla; 22.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. allowed; the summoning order dated 08.02.2024 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 152 of 2023 (Govind Singh Vs. Hemant Kumar and others) under Sections 323, 387, 427, 504, 506 IPC quashed. ¶25

Vinay Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned summoning order dated 08.02.2024 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 152 of 2023 under Sections 323, 387, 427, 504, 506 IPC should be quashed on the basis of the settlement/compromise arrived at between the parties, in exercise of the Court's inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶10

Court's answer

Both parties having agreed to withdraw the proceedings pending amongst them, and on perusal of the records and the law cited, the present case is a good case for exercise of power by the Court to quash the summoning order as well as the entire proceedings.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The dispute appears to be purely civil in nature, mutually settled between the parties to their entire satisfaction, and no useful purpose would be served in allowing the prosecution to continue any longer.

¶19

Key takeaways

The entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 152 of 2023 (Govind Singh Vs. Hemant Kumar and others) under Sections 323, 387, 427, 504, 506 IPC, before the Special Judge, Dacoity, Jalaun at Orai, are quashed, the alleged dispute arising out of personal dispute.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing on compromise — Allahabad High Court (Nand Prabha Shukla, J.), 22.09.2025, allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by Vinay Kumar and 2 Others seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 08.02.2024 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 152 of 2023 (Govind Singh Vs. Hemant Kumar and others) under Sections 323, 387, 427, 504, 506 IPC pending before the Special Judge, Dacoity, Jalaun at Orai. Pursuant to order dated 14.05.2024 the parties appeared with a compromise deed dated 30.03.2024, duly verified by the Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), District Jalaun at Orai vide order dated 21.06.2024; both sides and learned AGA did not oppose quashing. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Parbatbhai Ahir (2017) 9 SCC 641 and Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani (Criminal Appeal No. 3831 of 2025), the Court held the dispute purely civil in nature and mutually settled, and quashed the summoning order and entire proceedings.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11024 of 2024

¶3

Vinay Kumar And 2 Others

¶4

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Mritunjay Verma, Vishnu Kant Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., Manish Pandey

¶5

Court No. - 78

¶6

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2/complainant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash/stay the impugned summoning order dated 08.02.2024, in Complaint Case No. 152 of 2023 (Govind Singh Vs. Hemant Kumar and others), under Sections 323, 387, 427, 504, 506 IPC, passed by Special Judge, Dacoity, Jalaun at Orai.

¶9

Pursuant to the order dated 14.05.2024, the parties have appeared before the concerned court along with the compromise deed dated 30.03.2024 and the same has been duly verified by Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), District Jalaun at Orai vide order dated 21.06.2024.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present dispute arises out of personal dispute between the applicants and the opposite party no.2. It is also argued that the parties have willingly entered into a settlement and not under duress or threat or coercion and are not interested in pursuing the matter pending in the Court concerned and, therefore, the impugned proceedings be quashed on the ground of compromise between the parties and they do not propose to file the counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit.

¶11

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 admits the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants and states that he has no objection if the impugned proceeding pending against the applicants, is quashed.

¶12

A482 No. 11024 of 2024

¶13

¶14

Learned A.G.A. also does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties.

¶15

The law with regard to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled.

¶16

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Constitutional Bench Judgment in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, (2012)10 SCC 303 , has held that "But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim."

¶17

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Ahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641 has laid down broad principles of quashing the criminal proceedings in exercise of inherent jurisdiction on the ground that "even in the non compoundable cases on the basis of compromise, criminal proceedings can be quashed so that valuable time of the court can be saved and utilized in other material cases."

¶18

Both the parties have agreed to withdraw the proceedings pending amongst them in Court concerned. From perusal of the records and the law as cited above, the present case is a good case for exercise of power by the Court to quash summoning order as well as entire proceedings.

¶19

The dispute appears to be purely civil in nature that has been mutually settled between the parties to their entire satisfaction, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the prosecution to continue any longer.

¶20

The present application for quashing filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. comes

¶21

A482 No. 11024 of 2024

¶22

¶23

within the parameters as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, Criminal Appeal No. 3831 of 2025, SLP (Crl.) No. 11642 of 2019 dated 02.09.2025.

¶24

Considering the fact that the alleged dispute arises out of the personal dispute, the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 152 of 2023 (Govind Singh Vs. Hemant Kumar and others), under Sections 323, 387, 427, 504, 506 IPC, passed by Special Judge, Dacoity, Jalaun at Orai, are hereby quashed.

¶25

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed .

¶26

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

¶27

September 22, 2025 Nisha

¶28

Digitally signed by :- nisha kumari High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinay Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases