Rafeek and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rafeek and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application under Section 528 BNSS allowed; entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 930 of 2022 (State vs. Rafeek and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 117 of 2021, including charge sheet dated 02.07.2021 and cognizance/summoning order dated 08.06.2022 passed by learned Additional District Judge-I, Kannauj, quashed; parties permitted to file copy of the order before the court concerned within two weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 930 of 2022 (State vs. Rafeek and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 117 of 2021, including the charge sheet dated 02.07.2021 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 08.06.2022 passed by learned Additional District Judge-I, Kannauj, should be stayed and quashed on the basis of the compromise dated 21.02.2024 entered into between the parties.

Court's answer

On the verification report of the learned Additional District Judge-I, Kannauj on the compromise application dated 21.02.2024, 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 quashing the proceedings in light of the compromise would be in the interest of justice.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the settlement and relying on the principles in 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 entire proceeding of Sessions Trial No. 930 of 2022 (State vs. Rafeek and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 117 of 2021, including the charge sheet dated 02.07.2021 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 08.06.2022 passed by learned Additional District Judge-I, Kannauj, is quashed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court — Application u/s 528 BNSS allowed — Quashing of criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise between parties. Entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 930 of 2022 (State vs. Rafeek and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 117 of 2021 under Sections 147, 323, 427, 452, 504, 506, 308 IPC, Police Station Talgram, District Kannauj, including charge sheet dated 02.07.2021 and cognizance/summoning order dated 08.06.2022 passed by learned Additional District Judge-I, Kannauj, quashed. Verification report of the learned Additional District Judge-I confirmed the compromise dated 21.02.2024; fact of amicable settlement admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties with joint submission that quashing would serve the interest of justice. Court relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 (para 58: quashing permissible though offences not compoundable, continuation being an exercise in futility, securing ends of justice the ultimate guiding factor) and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692 (special facts/features warrant quashing to encourage genuine settlement). Parties to file copy of the order before the court concerned within two weeks. (Saurabh Srivastava, J.; decided October 10, 2025.)

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 19784 of 2025

Rafeek And 6 Others

	Versus	.....	Applicant(s)
State Of U.P. And 3 Others			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: :	Ram Babu Singh Anil Kumar Gupta,	G.A.

Court No. - 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Sri Ram Babu Singh, learned counsel for applicants, Sri Anil Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for State.

Present application u/s 528 BNSS has been preferred with a prayer to allow the instant application and stay and quash the entire proceeding of Sessions Trial No.930 of 2022 (State vs. Rafeek and others) arising out of Case crime no.117 of 2021 under Sections 147, 323, 427, 452, 504, 506, 308 of IPC, Police Station Talgram, District Kannauj including charge sheet dated 02.07.2021 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 08.06.2022 passed by learned Additional District Judge-I, Kannauj on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties dated 21.02.2024.

On the basis of verification report submitted by learned Additional District Judge-I, Kannauj on the compromise application dated 21.02.2024, entered between the parties which has been appended along with the supplementary affidavit dated 09.10.2025 available as Annexure no. SA1, the parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and it has been jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and it would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in the light of compromise.

NA528 No. 19784 of 2025

2

4.A three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble 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 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.

In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire proceeding of Sessions Trial No.930 of 2022 (State vs. Rafeek and others) arising out of Case crime no.117 of 2021 under Sections 147, 323, 427, 452, 504, 506, 308 of IPC, Police Station Talgram, District Kannauj including charge sheet dated 02.07.2021 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 08.06.2022 passed by learned Additional District Judge-I, Kannauj, are hereby quashed.

Accordingly, the present application under Section 528 BNSS stands allowed .

The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

October 10, 2025 Rakesh

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad