Allowed¶9

Asim and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2025A482/5572/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Raj Beer Singh, J.; Application U/S 482 No. 5572 of 2024, decided 20.1.2025 — quashing of complaint case under Sections 323, 504, 354-B IPC on the basis of a verified compromise; private dispute, no serious impact on society, no serious injury, complainant unwilling to proceed; State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, AIR 2019 SC 1296 applied; summoning order dated 16.02.2023 quashed against applicants Asim, Mateen, Rais and Laiq; P.S. Didauli, District Amroha; IInd A.C.J.(J.D.)/J.M., Amroha.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the summoning order dated 16.02.2023 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 24 of 2023 (Sections 323, 504, 354-B IPC, P.S. Didauli, District Amroha) against the applicants Asim, Mateen, Rais and Laiq, on the basis of the compromise between the parties. ¶9

Asim and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 16.02.2023 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 24 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504, 354-B IPC could be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶2

Court's answer

In appropriate cases, criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties.

¶7

Ratio / Principle

On the facts of this case — a private dispute with no serious impact on society, no criminal antecedents, both parties resident of the same town, no serious injury sustained, the complainant/injured unwilling to proceed, and the compromise verified by the trial court — considering the law laid down in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed.

¶7

Key takeaways

The impugned summoning order and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 24 of 2023 against the applicants (Asim, Mateen, Rais and Laiq) were quashed, and the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was allowed.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing — Section 482 Cr.P.C. — compromise between parties. An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by Asim and three others sought quashing of the summoning order dated 16.02.2023 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 24 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504, 354-B IPC (P.S. Didauli, District Amroha), pending before the IInd A.C.J.(J.D.)/J.M., Amroha, on the basis of a compromise between the parties. Held (Raj Beer Singh, J.), allowing the application: in appropriate cases criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties. The dispute was private in nature and had no serious impact on society; nothing indicated criminal antecedents of the parties; both parties were residents of the same town and no one sustained serious injury; the complainant/injured did not want to proceed with the case; and the compromise filed before the trial court had already been verified by the court concerned. Considering the law laid down in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, AIR 2019 SC 1296, and the facts of the matter, quashing was held to be in the interest of justice; the impugned summoning order and the entire proceedings against applicants Asim, Mateen, Rais and Laiq were quashed. The learned A.G.A. had no objection to the parties compromising the matter. Order dated 20.1.2025.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:9264

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5572 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Asim And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Fazil,Salman Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Umair Alam

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2/complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 16.02.2023, of complaint case No. 24 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 354-B IPC, P.S. Didauli, District Amroha, pending in the court of IInd A.C.J.(J.D.)/J.M., Amroha, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the alleged dispute between the parties has taken place due to misconception and that now both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter. The complainant/injured of the case does not want to pursue the impugned proceedings. It was further submitted that both the parties are residents of same town. In alleged incident no one has sustained any serious injury. It was stated that the compromise, filed by the parties before the trial court concerned, has already been verified by the court concerned, copy of which is also on record. It was stated that in view of these facts and circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned proceedings pending and thus, the impugned proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶9

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2/complainant has concurred with the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter. The complainant/injured of the case does not want to proceed with the case pending before the trial court and the impugned proceedings may be quashed.

¶10

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

¶11

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

¶12

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 the dispute between the parties appears to be private in nature and does not have any serious impact on society if parties compromise the matter. There is nothing to indicate that parties have any criminal antecedents. As stated earlier both the parties are residents of same town and that none of the party has sustained any serious injury. The complainant/injured of the case does not want to proceed with the case against the applicants. The compromise filed by the parties before the trial court, has already been verified by the court concerned. 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.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned summoning order and entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case against applicants, namely, Asim, Mateen, Rais and Laiq are hereby quashed.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 20.1.2025 Anand

¶16

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

Asim and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asim and 3 Others v. State of Up 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