Shahid and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shahid and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the chargesheet dated 13.12.2019, the cognizance order dated 16.12.2019 and the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.5729 of 2019 (State Vs. Shahid and others), arising out of Case Crime No.469 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, P.S. Tanda, District Rampur, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, on the basis of the compromise; with liberty to opposite party no.2 to seek recall of the order if he feels duped or betrayed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the chargesheet dated 13.12.2019, the cognizance order dated 16.12.2019 and the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.5729 of 2019 (State Vs. Shahid and others), arising out of Case Crime No.469 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, pending before the CJM, Rampur, should be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

The parties have amicably settled their dispute; the fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for the opposite parties, who jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error if the proceedings were quashed in light of the compromise.

Ratio / Principle

Keeping in mind the law laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 (para 58) and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692, and the verified compromise between the parties, the chargesheet dated 13.12.2019, the cognizance order dated 16.12.2019 and the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.5729 of 2019 (State Vs. Shahid and others), arising out of Case Crime No.469 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, are hereby quashed.

Key takeaways

Safeguard: if opposite party no. 2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, he may seek recall of this order by way of filing a recall application explaining the reasons; the order was passed after hearing the contesting parties.obiter¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.; order dated November 19, 2025) allowed Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 18125 of 2025 (Shahid and 2 others v. State of U.P. and another) and quashed the chargesheet dated 13.12.2019, the cognizance order dated 16.12.2019 and the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.5729 of 2019 (State v. Shahid and others), arising out of Case Crime No.469 of 2019 under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, P.S. Tanda, District Rampur, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, on the basis of a compromise between the parties that had been verified by the court concerned on 11.07.2025 and confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for the opposite parties. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 (para 58) and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692, the Court quashed the proceedings in light of the amicable settlement. Safeguard noted: opposite party no. 2, if he feels duped or betrayed, may seek recall of the order by filing a recall application explaining the reasons.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18125 of 2025

Shahid And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Krishna Kumar Singh, Mazhar Ullah : Rizwan Ahmad, G.A.

Court No. - 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Mr. Mazhar Ulla, learned counsel for applicants and Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA.

The present application has been filed to quash chargesheet dated 13.12.2019 along with cognizance order dated 16.12.2019 and entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.5729 of 2019 (State Vs. Shahid and others), arising out of Case Crime No.469 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, P.S. Tanda, District Rampur, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, on the basis of compromise.

At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants has submitted that compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified by learned court concerned on dated 11.07.2025 which has been appended with supplementary filed today, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error if the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise.

A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 , has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to

NA528 No. 18125 of 2025

2

an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.

In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties.

Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, chargesheet dated 13.12.2019 along with cognizance order dated 16.12.2019 and entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.5729 of 2019 (State Vs. Shahid and others), arising out of Case Crime No.469 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, P.S. Tanda, District Rampur, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, are hereby quashed.

Accordingly, the present application stands allowed .

This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may seek recall of this order by way of filing recall application explaining the reasons.

November 19, 2025 Vivek Kr.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

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