Allowed¶15

Tribhuwan Nath Pandey and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC9 Mar 2025A482/26503/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing of session trial on compromise between parties; family/property dispute; death of complainant and compromise by legal heirs/injured, verified by Trial Court; no criminal antecedents of applicants; Sections 147, 148, 452, 308, 323, 427 IPC; reliance on State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan AIR 2019 SC 1296; Allahabad High Court, Raj Beer Singh, J.; Application U/S 482 No. 26503 of 2024; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:35012; decided 10.3.2025.

What did the court decide?

Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. allowed; entire proceedings of S.T. No. 196 of 2016 against applicants Tribhuwan Nath Pandey, Anuj, Shailesh, Rajesh and Suraj quashed ¶15

Tribhuwan Nath Pandey and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. allowed; entire proceedings of S.T. No. 196 of 2016 against applicants Tribhuwan Nath Pandey, Anuj, Shailesh, Rajesh and Suraj quashed

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 196 of 2016 (State Vs. Tribhuwan Nath Pandey and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 261 of 2012, can be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶8

Court's answer

It is well settled that in appropriate cases criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

On the facts — parties resident of the same place and members of the same extended family, the complainant having died with his legal heirs / injured compromising with the applicants, the compromise verified by the Trial Court, the applicants having no criminal antecedents, and the dispute being private in nature without adverse impact on society — considering the law laid down in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan (AIR 2019 SC 1296), quashing the impugned proceedings would be in the interest of justice.

¶13

Key takeaways

The entire proceedings of the session trial (S.T. No. 196 of 2016) against applicants Tribhuwan Nath Pandey, Anuj, Shailesh, Rajesh and Suraj are quashed.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal proceedings — quashing on basis of compromise (S. 482 Cr.P.C.) — parties belong to the same extended family and the dispute arose out of a property dispute; during pendency of S.T. No. 196 of 2016 (Case Crime No. 261 of 2012, Sections 147, 148, 452, 308, 323, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Nawabganj, District Prayagraj) the parties amicably settled; the complainant has since passed away and his legal heirs / injured persons executed a compromise verified by the Trial Court pursuant to this Court's order; applicants have no criminal antecedents and the dispute is private in nature; following State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan, AIR 2019 SC 1296, the entire proceedings against Tribhuwan Nath Pandey, Anuj, Shailesh, Rajesh and Suraj were quashed and the application was allowed.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35012

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26503 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Tribhuwan Nath Pandey And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Bahadur Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Certified copy of compromise verification report is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 196 of 2016 (State Vs. Tribhuwan Nath Pandey and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 261 of 2012, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 308, 323, 427 I.P.C., Police Station - Nawabganj, District - Prayagraj, pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Room No. 06, Prayagraj.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that both the parties belong to one and same extended family and there was some property dispute between them. The incident in question took place under misconception and both the sides have sustained injuries. None of the injured has sustained any serious injuries. During the pendency of this case, both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the case. In pursuance to order of this Court, both the parties have filed compromise before the Trial Court, which has duly been verified. The complainant of the case has since passed away and his legal heirs / injured are part

¶10

of the compromise. It was submitted that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned proceedings pending and thus, the same may be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has no objection if parties compromise the matter.

¶12

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

¶13

It is well settled that in appropriate cases criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties. In the instant case, it appears that both the parties are resident of same place and they are stated members of same extended family. The complainant has since passed away. The injured persons / legal heirs of deceased complainant have compromised the case with the applicants. The compromise has already been verified by the Trial Court concerned. The applicants have no criminal antecedent. It was submitted that dispute between the parties is private in nature and if parties compromise the case, it would not have any adverse impact on society. Considering the law laid down in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296 and the facts of the matter, it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid session trial against applicants, namely, Tribhuwan Nath Pandey, Anuj, Shailesh, Rajesh and Suraj are, hereby, quashed.

¶15

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed .

¶16

Order Date :- 10.3.2025 SK Srivastava

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tribhuwan Nath Pandey and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tribhuwan Nath Pandey and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 6 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