Allowed¶13

Rajeev Kumar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2025A482/4321/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench; APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 4321 of 2025; Rajeev Kumar v. State of U.P.; quashing of criminal proceedings on compromise/settlement between parties; matrimonial dispute; Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC; Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act; Case Crime No.0653 of 2015; Criminal Case No. 13083 of 2017; P.S. Gaazipur, District Lucknow; compromise deed dated 15.05.2025 verified 05.06.2025; B.S. Joshi; Nikhil Merchant; Manoj Sharma; Gian Singh; Narindra Singh; Om Prakash Shukla, J.; order dated 3.7.2025; neutral citation 2025:AHC-LKO:37645.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; entire proceeding arising out of Case Crime No.0653 of 2015 under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 DP Act, police station Gaazipur, District Lucknow quashed. ¶13

Rajeev Kumar and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37645

¶2

Court No. - 30

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4321 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kaushalendra K. Tripathi,Alok Kumar Yadav,Avinash Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dharmendra Kumar Yadav

¶5

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Dharmendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶7

2. By means of the instant application, the applicants have prayed for quashing of entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 13083 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No.0653 of 2015 under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 DP Act, police station Gaazipur, District Lucknow as well as charge sheet no.01 of 2020 dated 03.09.2016 and summoning order dated 10.04.2017.

¶8

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that due to some matrimonial dispute the instant F.I.R. was lodged against the applicants. He added that later on, the parties sat together and have amicably settled their disputes, which has been reduced in writing on 15.05.2025 which is annexed as Annexure No.2 to the application. Thereafter, in compliance of order dated 22.05.2025, passed by this Court, the parties have appeared before Court below on 05.06.2025 on which date the compromise deed was verified, copy of verification order is annexed as A1 to the affidavit filed today which is taken on record. He submits that now there is no dispute in between the parties and they have settled their dispute. He submits that further criminal proceedings in the instant matter would amount to harassment and, thus, the instant criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.0653 of 2015 may be quashed.

¶9

4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the opposite party no.2 has no grievance, hence, criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped. Learned

¶10

counsel for the State has no objection to the submissions aforesaid.

¶11

5 . Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on 15.05.2025 and said compromise has been verified on 05.06.2025 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned criminal proceedings relating to Case Crime No.0653 of 2015.

¶12

6. In view of the above, as the applicants and opposite parties have entered into compromise on 15.05.2025 and no grievance remains to be agitated and, as such, further criminal proceedings in the aforementioned criminal case are liable to be set aside in view of the Judgments of the Apex Court rendered in B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008) 9 SCC 677; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466 .

¶13

7. Accordingly, entire proceeding arising out of arising out of Case Crime No.0653 of 2015 under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 DP Act, police station Gaazipur, District Lucknow are hereby quashed.

¶14

8. The application is allowed accordingly.

¶15

(Om Prakash Shukla, J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 3.7.2025 Arnima

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajeev Kumar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Kumar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. 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

Sushil Tiwari @ Durgadatt Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Wajeid Ali @ Wajid Ali and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pawan Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Raghvendra Prasad Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Santosh Joshi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Krishnakant Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others