Kulveer Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Jul 2025A482/27805/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 quashing; 498A, 323, 504, 506, 324 IPC; Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act; Case Crime No. 221 of 2022; Case No. 3740 of 2023; P.S. Mandi Dhanaura, District Amroha; compromise dated 14.06.2024 verified 02.06.2025; matrimonial dispute; abuse of process; trial an exercise in futility; Parbatbhai Aahir (2017) 9 SCC 641; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688; applicant Kulveer Singh; charge-sheet and cognizance order quashed; application allowed; 2025:AHC:125231.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the charge-sheet dated 30.08.2022, the cognizance order dated 15.07.2023 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 3740 of 2023 (Case Crime No. 221 of 2022). ¶¶16

Kulveer Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the charge-sheet dated 30.08.2022, the cognizance order dated 15.07.2023 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 3740 of 2023 (Case Crime No. 221 of 2022).

¶¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge-sheet dated 30.08.2022, the cognizance order dated 15.07.2023 and the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 221 of 2022 ought to be quashed in view of the compromise and settlement between the parties.

¶¶7

Court's answer

The criminal proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute and there were no overbearing circumstances requiring the applicants to be prosecuted even after the parties entered into a settlement.

¶¶11

Ratio / Principle

In view of the parties' settlement, there is practically no chance of recording conviction even if the case is put to trial, and the entire exercise of trial would only be an exercise in futility.

¶¶12

Key takeaways

Continuation of the criminal proceeding despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer would tantamount to abuse of process of law, and putting the criminal case to an end secures the ends of justice.ratio¶¶13
Applying the well-settled principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan, the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed.ratio¶¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Vikram D. Chauhan, J.; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:125231): Application under Section 482 (No. 27805 of 2024) allowed. Charge-sheet dated 30.08.2022 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 324 IPC and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act (Police Station Mandi Dhanaura, District Amroha) and cognizance order dated 15.07.2023 in Case Crime No. 221 of 2022 (Case No. 3740 of 2023) quashed. Parties had compromised on 14.06.2024, verified by the court on 02.06.2025; opposite party no.2 did not wish to proceed and the State raised no objection, there being virtually no chance of conviction. Held: the proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute; trial would be an exercise in futility; continuance despite compromise would amount to abuse of process. Reliance placed on Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:125231

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27805 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Kulveer Singh And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Vishal Kumar Sonkar,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Vishal Kumar Sonkar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 30.08.2022 and cognizance order dated 15.07.2023, as well as, entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 3740 of 2023 (State vs. Kulveer Singh and others) being Case Crime No. 221 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 324 1.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station Mandi Dhanaura, District Amroha.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 14.06.2024 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 02.06.2025 , therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶9

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.

¶10

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.

¶11

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 matrimonial dispute; and there are no such over bearing circumstances for which the applicants

¶12

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.

¶13

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.

¶14

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 14.06.2024, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶15

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.

¶16

The present application is, accordingly, allowed .

¶17

Order Date :- 29.7.2025 S.Prakash

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SHASHI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kulveer Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulveer Singh and 4 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