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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application allowed; entire criminal proceedings of Case No.12933 of 2014 (State Vs. Arif and others), arising out of Case Crime No.1306 of 2008, under Sections 504, 506 IPC, pending before the Additional Cheif Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Ghazaibad, quashed on the basis of the verified compromise, with liberty reserved to opposite party no. 2 to seek recall of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.12933 of 2014 (State Vs. Arif and others), arising out of Case Crime No.1306 of 2008, under Sections 504, 506 IPC, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Ghaziabad, should be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties.

Court's answer

Since the parties have amicably settled their dispute and the compromise has been verified by the trial court, there would be no harm and error if the criminal proceedings are quashed in light of the compromise.

Ratio / Principle

The entire criminal proceedings of Case No.12933 of 2014 (State Vs. Arif and others), arising out of Case Crime No.1306 of 2008, under Sections 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of the learned Additional Cheif Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Ghazaibad, are hereby quashed.

Key takeaways

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.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 20515 of 2025, decided November 19, 2025 — Allowed. Entire criminal proceedings in Case No.12933 of 2014 (State v. Arif and others), arising out of Case Crime No.1306 of 2008 under Sections 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Ghaziabad, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Ghaziabad, were quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties verified by the trial court on 19.08.2025. Reliance was placed 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 for quashing proceedings upon genuine settlement notwithstanding the nature of the offences. Opposite party no. 2 was accorded liberty to seek recall of the order by filing a recall application if he felt duped or betrayed.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 20515 of 2025

Arif Ahmed And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Azaz Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard Mr. Azaz Ahmad, learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA.

The present application has been filed to quash entire criminal proceedings of Case No.12933 of 2014 (State Vs. Arif and others), arising out of Case Crime No.1306 of 2008, under Sections 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of learned Additional Cheif Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Ghazaibad, 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 19.08.2025 which has been appended with supplementary affidavit filed today.

The parties have amicably settled their dispute and as as, there would be no harm and error if the proceedings is 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 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

NA528 No. 20515 of 2025

2

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, entire criminal proceedings of Case No.12933 of 2014 (State Vs. Arif and others), arising out of Case Crime No.1306 of 2008, under Sections 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of learned Additional Cheif Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Ghazaibad, are hereby quashed.

Accordingly, the present application stands allowed .

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