Afifa @ Afifa Hayat and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt Home Lko. and Another

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Shyamendra Singh, learned AGA for the State and Sri Pramod Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party No.2/informant.

¶10

In compliance of the order dated October 31, 2025, Afifa alias Afifa Hayat aged about 19 years wife of Faiz Khan-the petitioner no.1 and opposite party no.2-Hina Zareen is present in-person. They have jointly stated before the Court that they had entered into the compromise. Petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2-Faiz Khan aged about 22 years are having minor-child and they are living happily as married couple and 'responsible-parents'. Opposite party no.2-the first informant also endorses that she does not want to continue with the proceeding of the case.

¶11

She further stated that she she is the real-mother of petitioner no.1 and in in the welfare of her daughter, she does not want to contest the case against petitioner no.2 and prayed to quash the charge-sheet, in the interest of justice.

¶12

Brief-facts of the case are that the marriage of the petitioners were fixed by their parents and it is postponed due to some mis-understanding between the families of the petitioners. The alleged first information report was lodged by informant against petitioner, which is registered as Case Crime No.208 of 2021 under Sections 363 and 366 IPC registered at

¶13

A482 No. 7400 of 2022

¶14

2

¶15

Police Station-Hasanganj, District-Lucknow.

¶16

The opposite party no.2 accepted that petitioner no.2 amicably settled the matter and informed the Investigating Officer of the case about the same. She further stated that she cannot want any legal-action against petitioner no.2 and I.O. of the case assured that he will submit the finalreport in the case. Despite amicable settlement, the I.O. arrested petitioner no.2 and sent him jail. The I.O. of the case given false information of opposite party no.2 as well as petitioners and he submitted the falsechargesheet against the petitioner no.2.

¶17

The petitioners submitted that they are husband-wife and the case was lodged only in some confusion. The petitioners and the complainant arrived in conclusion to derail the dispute and not to pursue the case under challenge, any further. Both the families of the petitioners and the informant have arrived amicable settlement and they have also settled all their differences and they have decided to not pursue the case in future. The offences are punishable under Sections 363 and 366 IPC and they are not compoundable. Hence, the petitioners are before this Hon'ble Court.

¶18

This Court has got inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the current proceeding and to permit compounding offence and noncompounding offence, in the interest of justice.

¶19

First informant/opposite party no.2 has filed her counter affidavit. She is the real-mother of petitioner no.1 and she agreed, the matter between petitioners no.1 and 2 are settled amicably. The opposite party no.2/first informant had specifically deposed in paragraph-10 of her counter affidavit that opposite party no.2, who is the real mother of petitioner no.1 and in the welfare of her daughter, she does not want to contest the case against petitioner no.2 and further prays to quash the charge-sheet in the interest of justice.

¶20

The present matter is a matrimonial-dispute and it has been amicably settled between the parties. Therefore, it is a futile exercise to proceed with the case. Both the petitioners as well as the first informant, i.e., opposite party no.2 are agreed for the same.

¶21

A482 No. 7400 of 2022

¶22

3

¶23

The learned AGA for the State has not disputed this fact that the matter is amicably settled and it may be decided to safeguard the matrimonial relationship and family.

¶24

After consideration of all the facts, reasons and circumstances and a due-consideration that it is a matrimonial-dispute. The family is nucleus of the society. Any further litigation would further complicate the matter. It will be a futile exercise to continue with the litigation.

¶25

Hence, the charge-sheet No.01 of 2021 dated 15.9.2021 arising out of Case Crime No.208 of 2021 under Sections 363 and 366 IPC, Police Station-Hasanganj, District-Lucknow and the summoning order dated 5.2.2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow in Criminal Case No.1958 of 2022 titled State vs. Faiz Khan and the proceedings thereof are hereby quashed.

¶26

13 Resultantly, this application under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is hereby allowed.

¶27

(Abdul Shahid,J.)

¶28

November 12, 2025

¶29

LNTripathi

¶30

Digitally signed by :- LALIT TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Afifa @ Afifa Hayat and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Afifa @ Afifa Hayat and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chand Babu Vs State of U.P.

Sangam Lal Aarak vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra Alias Shankar vs State of U.P. and Another

Mangal Dev vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Hariram Ramkhelavan Varma vs Sub Divisional Officer Tehsil Jaisinghpur Dist. Sultanpur and 7 Others