Allowed

Brijesh Dwivedi Alias Brijesh Kumar Dubey and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 Apr 2025A482/3158/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Section 482 application sought quashing of proceedings under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 DP Act arising from a matrimonial dispute. The parties reached a verified compromise and did not wish to prosecute; relying on Apex Court precedent on settlement-based quashing, the court allowed the application and quashed the entire proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings of Case No. 59255 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 727 of 2017 quashed.

Brijesh Dwivedi Alias Brijesh Kumar Dubey and 2 Others… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3158 of 2025

¶3

Brijesh Dwivedi Alias Brijesh Kumar Dubey And 2 Others

¶4

.....Applicant(s) Versus State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Durgendra Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ravi Shankar Mishra

¶5

Court No. - 14

¶6

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶7

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

¶8

The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 59255 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 727 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. PGI, District Lucknow.

¶9

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 11.04.2025 passed in the present case, the matter was sent before the court below for verification of the compromise deed.

¶10

It is evident from the record that the factum of the compromise has been verified by the court below vide his report dated 24.04.2025. The compromise deed is appended as Annexure SA 1 to the supplementary affidavit, which goes to show that respondent nos. 2 and 3 do not want to prosecute the applicants.

¶11

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.

¶12

A482 No. 3158 of 2025

¶13

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

Entire proceedings of Case No. 59255 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 727 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. PGI, District Lucknow are hereby quashed.

¶18

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

¶19

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶20

December 16, 2025 VKS

¶21

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

Brijesh Dwivedi Alias Brijesh Kumar Dubey and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brijesh Dwivedi Alias Brijesh Kumar Dubey and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Luvkush Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Peer Mohammad Vs Kumar Harsh Distt. Magistrate Sultanpur and 2 Others

Avinash Yadav Vs Sri. Dr. Mahendra Deo, Director Secondary Education, Prayagraj U.P. and Another

Reshma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Km. Shalu Shukla Vs Pratibha Goel Vice Chancellor Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Awadh University Ayodhya

Ram Nath Vs Rajesh Chaudhry, the Chief Accounts Officer, U.P. Jal Nigam, (Urban) Lko.