Shyam Babu Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 17273 of 2025

Shyam Babu Yadav And 3 Others

	Versus		.....Appl	icant(s)
State of U.P. and Another			.....O	pposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sanjay Singh	Kr. Srivastava,	Vivek	Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 76

¶6

HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

This application has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No.178 of 2025, State Vs. Shyam Babu Yadav and others, arising out of Case Crime No.221 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against applicant no.1 and under Sections 498A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against applicant nos.2 to 4, Police Station Ghoorpur, District Prayagraj as well as charge sheet dated 20.12.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 16.4.2025 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Prayagraj.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties through mediation before Mediation Centre of this Court on 26.8.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶10

Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement which is duly verified by the court concerned. It is further submitted that he would have no objection in case criminal proceedings are put to an end. He further submits that in view of settlement there is virtually no chance of any conviction being recorded in the criminal proceedings.

¶11

NA528 No. 17273 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

Having examined the matter in its totality, this Court is of the view that the criminal proceedings in the present case had essentially been an outcome of a matrimonial dispute; and there are no such over bearing circumstances for which the applicants ought to be prosecuted even after the parties has entered into a settlement. Needless to observe that with the present stand of the parties in terms of their settlement, there is practically no chance of recording conviction, even if the case under the F.I.R. in question is put to trial. In other words, entire exercise of trial would only be an exercise in futility. On the contrary, looking to the nature of dispute and the fact that the disputants have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings in question are quashed.

¶14

It would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end.

¶15

In view of the fact that the parties do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and the fact that matter has been mutually settled between the parties in view of the compromise through mediation before Mediation Centre of this Court on 26.8.2025, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶16

Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688 , the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

¶17

The present application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶18

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

¶19

September 22, 2025 Bhaskar

¶20

Digitally signed by :- BHASKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shyam Babu Yadav and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Babu Yadav and 3 Others v. State of U.P. 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