Mohd Arif Alias Arif and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mohd Arif Alias Arif and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the impugned chargesheets/cognizance-summoning order and the entire proceedings of Case No.- 1982/IX of 2004 (State Vs. Arif) arising out of Case Crime No.- 72 of 2004, under Sections 394, 323, 336, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Mathura, pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.-I, Mathura, against the applicants Mohd. Arif @ Arif, Imran and Mohd. Usman Qureshi @ Usman, on the basis of compromise; the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No.- 1982/IX of 2004 (State Vs. Arif) arising out of Case Crime No.- 72 of 2004, under Sections 394, 323, 336, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.-I, Mathura, along with the chargesheets/cognizance-summoning order, may be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

It is well settled that in appropriate cases criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the law laid down in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296, and the facts of the matter — parties having settled all disputes and compromised, compromise verified by the court concerned, complainant not wishing to pursue the proceedings, no adverse impact on society, no criminal antecedents indicated, counter affidavit of opposite party no. 2 supporting quashment, and no objection from the learned A.G.A. — it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed.

Key takeaways

The impugned chargesheets/cognizance-summoning order and entire proceedings of Case No.- 1982/IX of 2004 (State Vs. Arif) arising out of Case Crime No.- 72 of 2004, under Sections 394, 323, 336, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Mathura, against applicants Mohd. Arif @ Arif, Imran and Mohd. Usman Qureshi @ Usman are hereby quashed.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.), Application U/S 482 No. - 9775 of 2024 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:145561), Order Date 22.8.2025 — Allowed. Entire proceedings of Case No.- 1982/IX of 2004 (State Vs. Arif), arising out of Case Crime No.- 72 of 2004 under Sections 394, 323, 336, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Mathura, pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.-I, Mathura, together with the chargesheets/cognizance-summoning order, were quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the basis of a compromise between the applicants (Mohd. Arif @ Arif, Imran and Mohd. Usman Qureshi @ Usman) and opposite party no. 2; the compromise had been verified by the trial court with its report on record, the complainant did not wish to pursue the proceedings, no criminal antecedents of the parties were indicated, the counter affidavit of opposite party no. 2 sought quashment, and the learned A.G.A. raised no objection; the decision was made considering the law laid down in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:145561

Court No. - 89

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9775 of 2024

Applicant :- Mohd Arif Alias Arif And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vaibhav Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Bhavesh Kumar Mishra,G.A.

Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.

The matter has been taken up as mentioned cases.

Heard Mr. Vaibhav Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Yogesh Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Bhavesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and Mr. O.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State.

The present application has been filed with prayer to quash entire proceedings of Case No.- 1982/IX of 2004 (State Vs. Arif) arising out of Case Crime No.- 72 of 2004, under Sections 394, 323, 336, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Mathura pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.-I, Mathura on the basis of compromise.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants and opposite party no.2 have entered into compromise and they have amicably settled all the disputes on the basis of compromise. The compromise has already been verified by learned court concerned and report of proceedings of verification of compromise is on record. It was submitted that the complainant does not want to pursue the impugned proceedings. 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.

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

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

It is well settled that in appropriate cases criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise. In the instant case it

was submitted that both the parties have settled all the disputes and compromised the matter. It was submitted on behalf of both the parties that impugned proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties. If parties compromise the matter, it would not have adverse impact on society. There is nothing to indicate that parties have any criminal antecedents. The counter affidavit of opposite party no.2 is also on record, wherein it has been stated that the impugned proceedings may be quashed. 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.

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned chargesheets/cognizance-summoning order and entire proceedings of Case No.- 1982/IX of 2004 (State Vs. Arif) arising out of Case Crime No.- 72 of 2004, under Sections 394, 323, 336, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Mathura, against applicants, namely, Mohd. Arif @ Arif, Imran and Mohd. Usman Qureshi @ Usman are hereby quashed.

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

Order Date :- 22.8.2025 Virendra

Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTEEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad