Dinesh Tomar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Dinesh Tomar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the entire proceeding in pursuance of the Charge Sheet dated 15.08.2010 in Case No.12230 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 503 of 2010 (Sections 452, 352, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Tajganj, District Agra); the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was accordingly allowed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceeding in pursuance of the Charge Sheet dated 15.08.2010 in Case No.12230 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 503 of 2010 (Sections 452, 352, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Tajganj, District Agra) should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

The impugned entire proceeding in pursuance of the Charge Sheet dated 15.08.2010 in Case No.12230 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 503 of 2010, under Sections 452, 352, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Tajganj, District Agra, is hereby quashed.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the facts and circumstances, including the parties' settlement verified by the trial court, and the Apex Court position relied upon that compromise can subsist even for certain cognizable and non-compoundable offences, this Court held that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the case.

Key takeaways

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed.ratio¶¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Deepak Verma, J.), order dated 8.7.2025, Application U/S 482 No. 28438 of 2024 (neutral citation 2025:AHC:106960): Applicants Dinesh Tomar and another sought quashing of the entire proceeding in pursuance of the Charge Sheet dated 15.08.2010 in Case No.12230 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 503 of 2010 (State Vs. Dinesh Tomar & Another) under Sections 452, 352, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Tajganj, District Agra, on the footing of an amicable out-of-court settlement with opposite party no.2, who confirmed he had no objection to quashing. By earlier order dated 04.09.2024 this Court had referred the compromise to the trial court, which verified the parties and the compromise application (order dated 17.10.2024, transmitted by letter dated 19.10.2024). Relying on Narindra Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688 (per the Apex Court, compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non-compoundable offences), with reference to Shaifullah [2013 (83) ACC 278], the Court held that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings, quashed the entire proceeding pursuant to the charge sheet, and allowed the Section 482 application.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106960

Court No. - 72

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28438 of 2024

Applicant :- Dinesh Tomar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Girish Kumar

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

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

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceeding in pursuance of Charge Sheet dated 15.08.2010 in Case No.12230 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 503 of 2010, State Vs. Dinesh Tomar & Another, Under Sections 452, 352, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Tajganj, District Agra.

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicant approached this Hon'ble Court by filing this 482 application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 04.09.2024 sent the matter to trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 17.10.2024 verified the parties as well as compromise application, the same has been transmitted by trial court vide letter dated 19.10.2024. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their private and civil dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai 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 Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and noncompoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.

Accordingly, the impugned entire proceeding in pursuance of Charge Sheet dated 15.08.2010 in Case No.12230 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 503 of 2010, Under Sections 452, 352, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Tajganj, District Agra, is hereby quashed .

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed .

Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Nitin Verma

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad