Akhilesh Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2025A482/2582/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 quashing on compromise; charge sheet 13.10.2023 and cognizance order 10.01.2024 (Case No. 1065 of 2024; FIR No. 222 of 2023; 498-A, 376, 323 IPC; 3/4 DP Act; P.S. Aliganj, Lucknow) quashed after trial-court-verified compromise (report dated 12.02.2025); Gian Singh, B.S. Joshi, Narinder Singh relied upon; application allowed by Rajeev Singh, J. on 26.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; charge sheet dated 13.10.2023, cognizance order dated 10.01.2024 (Case No. 1065 of 2024, arising out of F.I.R. No. 222 of 2023) and the entire proceedings quashed; Office directed to send a copy of the order to the court concerned forthwith. ¶¶19

Akhilesh Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet dated 13.10.2023, the cognizance order dated 10.01.2024 passed in Case No. 1065 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 222 of 2023 (Sections 498-A, 376, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Aliganj, District Lucknow) and the entire proceedings should be quashed in exercise of inherent power in view of the compromise between the parties. +1 more

¶¶11

Court's answer

Drawing on the catena of Hon'ble Apex Court decisions (Gian Singh, B.S. Joshi, Narinder Singh), this court holds that inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶¶17

Ratio / Principle

From the record, the factum of the compromise has been verified by the court below vide report dated 12.02.2025, and respondent nos. 2 and 3 do not want to prosecute the applicants.

¶¶13

Key takeaways

Since the parties do not want to pursue the case further and the matter has been mutually settled by way of compromise, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter any further.ratio¶¶18
The charge sheet dated 13.10.2023 and the cognizance order dated 10.01.2024 passed in Case No. 1065 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 222 of 2023 (Sections 498-A, 376, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Aliganj, District Lucknow) and the entire proceedings are quashed; the application is allowed.ratio¶¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad HC (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 14 (Rajeev Singh, J.), decision dated 26.11.2025 — Application u/s 482 No. 2582 of 2025: Charge sheet dated 13.10.2023 and cognizance order dated 10.01.2024 in Case No. 1065 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 222 of 2023 (Sections 498-A, 376, 323 I.P.C.; Section 3/4 D.P. Act; P.S. Aliganj, District Lucknow) and entire proceedings QUASHED. Compromise between applicants and opposite party nos. 2 & 3 verified by court below vide report dated 12.02.2025 (following earlier order dated 30.01.2025 in Application u/s 482 No. 895 of 2025); A.G.A. conceded compromise effected and verified. Relied on Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333; B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675; Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 — inherent power exercisable where settlement arrived at between parties.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2582 of 2025

¶3

Akhilesh Singh And 4 Others

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 2 Others

¶7

Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hemant Kumar Mishra, Abhishek Mishra, Arti Ganguly Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Prabhu Sharan, Rajesh Kumar Sharma

¶8

Court No. - 14

¶9

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2 and 3.

¶11

The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 13.10.2023 as well as cognizance order dated 10.01.2024 passed in Case No. 1065 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 222 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 376, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Aliganj, District Lucknow and its entire proceedings.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 and 3 jointly submit that in pursuance of the earlier order dated 30.01.2025 passed in Application u/s 482 No. 895 of 2025, the matter was sent before the court below for verification of the compromise deed.

¶13

It is evident from the record that the factum of the compromise has been verified by the court below vide his report dated 12.02.2025. The compromise deed is appended as Annexure 5 to the application, which goes to show that respondent nos. 2 and 3 do not want to prosecute the applicants.

¶14

A482 No. 2582 of 2025

¶15

¶16

Learned A.G.A. fairly concedes that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court below.

¶17

Hon'ble Apex Court, in catena of decisions, viz., Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333 , B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further and the matter has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter any further.

¶19

For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed.

¶20

Charge sheet dated 13.10.2023 as well as cognizance order dated 10.01.2024 passed in Case No. 1065 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 222 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 376, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Aliganj, District Lucknow and its entire proceedings are hereby quashed.

¶21

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned, forthwith.

¶22

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶23

November 26, 2025 VKS

¶24

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akhilesh Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhilesh Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

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

Maneesh Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Taukeer Husain Abidi @ Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Neetu Pandey vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Finance Govt. of India New Delhi and 4 Others

Vijay Bahadur Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Lko. and Another

Akhilesh Singh and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Mohammad Israr and 3 Others vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others