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

Khanchand 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 22.02.2020 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.550 of 2020 (State Vs. Bittu @ Shioraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No.71 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal, pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, Sambhal, on the basis of the compromise; opposite party no. 2 left free to seek recall of the order by filing a recall application explaining the reasons.

Issue for consideration

Whether the chargesheet dated 22.02.2020 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.550 of 2020 (State Vs. Bittu @ Shioraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No.71 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal, pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, Sambhal, should be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties. +1 more

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

Keeping in mind the position of law and the facts and circumstances of the case, this court ordered that the chargesheet dated 22.02.2020 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.550 of 2020 (State Vs. Bittu @ Shioraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No.71 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal, pending in the court of the Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, Sambhal, are hereby quashed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal proceedings — quashing on compromise (S. 528 BNSS). HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Saurabh Srivastava, J.; November 18, 2025): Allowed Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 22625 of 2025 (Khanchand and 2 others v. State of U.P. and another) and quashed the chargesheet dated 22.02.2020 and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.550 of 2020 (State Vs. Bittu @ Shioraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No.71 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal, pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, Sambhal, because the parties had amicably settled their dispute and the compromise had been verified by the learned court concerned on 06.11.2025. Relied 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]. Opposite party no. 2 was left at liberty to seek recall of the order by way of a recall application explaining the reasons.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22625 of 2025

Khanchand And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Vishal Kumar Sonkar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA.

The present application has been filed to quash chargesheet dated 22.02.2020 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.550 of 2020 (State Vs. Bittu @ Shioraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No.71 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506 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.

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.

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.

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. 22625 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, chargesheet dated 22.02.2020 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.550 of 2020 (State Vs. Bittu @ Shioraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No.71 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, Sambhal, 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 18, 2025 Vivek Kr.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

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