Niresh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC28 Jul 2025NA528/22596/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of criminal proceedings on compromise/settlement; Application U/S 528 BNSS; Case Crime No.147 of 2020; Sections 452, 323, 324, 504 IPC; P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia (1988) 1 SCC 692; non-compoundable offences; verified compromise dated 06.11.2025; Allahabad High Court; Saurabh Srivastava, J.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of chargesheet dated 18.04.2020 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.614 of 2021 (State Vs. Naresh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504 IPC; liberty reserved to opposite party no. 2 to seek recall of the order. ¶¶21

Niresh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the chargesheet dated 18.04.2020 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.614 of 2021 (State Vs. Naresh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2020 under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504 IPC, deserve to be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶¶12

Court's answer

Where the parties have amicably settled their dispute, there would be no harm and error if the criminal proceedings are quashed in light of the compromise.

¶¶14

Ratio / Principle

The chargesheet dated 18.04.2020 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.614 of 2021 (State Vs. Naresh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504 IPC, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal, pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, Sambhal, are quashed.

¶¶20

Key takeaways

Liberty reserved to opposite party no. 2: if he feels duped or betrayed, he may seek recall of this order by way of a recall application explaining the reasons.obiter¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application under Section 528 BNSS allowed by the Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.; November 18, 2025): chargesheet dated 18.04.2020 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.614 of 2021 (State Vs. Naresh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504 IPC, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal, pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, Sambhal, quashed on the basis of a compromise verified by the concerned court on 06.11.2025. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 (para 58) and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692, the Court held that where the parties have amicably settled their dispute, there is no harm or error in quashing the proceedings. Liberty reserved to opposite party no. 2 to seek recall of the order if he feels duped or betrayed.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22596 of 2025

Niresh And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Santosh	Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 77

¶10

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA.

¶12

The present application has been filed to quash chargesheet dated 18.04.2020 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.614 of 2021 (State Vs. Naresh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504 IPC, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, Sambhal, on the basis of compromise.

¶13

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 06.11.2025 which has been appended with this petition.

¶14

When the parties have amicably settled their dispute, there would be no harm and error if the proceedings is quashed in light of the compromise.

¶15

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.

¶16

In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has

¶17

NA528 No. 22596 of 2025

¶18

¶19

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.

¶20

Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, chargesheet dated 18.04.2020 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.614 of 2021 (State Vs. Naresh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504 IPC, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, Sambhal, are hereby quashed.

¶21

Accordingly, the present application stands allowed .

¶22

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.

¶23

November 18, 2025 Vivek Kr.

¶24

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

¶25

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

Niresh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niresh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Ajay vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shakeel and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Tejpal Singh @ Teja vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashutosh Mishra vs State of U.P. and Another

Gaurav Dua vs State of Up and Another

Sandeep vs State of U.P. and Another