Pappu Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

Pappu Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The application under Section 528 BNSS was allowed and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 190 of 2022 (State versus Pappu Yadav and others) were quashed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 190 of 2022 (arising from Case Crime No. 0007 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 D.P. Act), which essentially emanate from a matrimonial dispute, should be quashed on the basis of the compromise/settlement between the parties dated 24.7.2025 verified by the court concerned.

Court's answer

The criminal proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute; with the parties having entered into a settlement, there are no overbearing circumstances for which the applicants ought to be prosecuted, there is practically no chance of recording conviction even if the FIR case is put to trial, the trial would be an exercise in futility, and quashing would be in the interest of justice.

Ratio / Principle

Continuation of the criminal proceedings despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer would be unfair, contrary to the interest of justice, and tantamount to abuse of process of law; to secure the ends of justice it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end.

Key takeaways

Since the parties do not want to pursue the case any further and the matter has been mutually settled in view of the compromise dated 24.7.2025, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.ratio¶¶17
In view of the well-settled principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688, the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 190 of 2022 are hereby quashed.ratio¶¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal quashing — matrimonial dispute — compromise verified by court. The Allahabad High Court (Vikram D. Chauhan, J.) allowed an application under Section 528 BNSS and quashed the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 190 of 2022 (State versus Pappu Yadav and others), pending before the Civil Judge Junior Division/F.T.C.-1, Kaushambi, arising from Case Crime No. 0007 of 2022 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Kaushambi. Holding the prosecution to be essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute, that following the parties' compromise (deed dated 05.03.2025; compromise entered and verified on 24.7.2025) there was practically no chance of conviction and continued trial would be an exercise in futility amounting to abuse of process, and relying on the principles laid down in Parbatbhai Aahir (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688, the Court quashed the proceedings in the interest of justice.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22812 of 2025

Pappu Yadav And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kamal Kishor Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 76

HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record.

1-A. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present application has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.190 of 2022 (State versus Pappu Yadav and others) in relation to Case Crime No. 0007 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Kaushambi pending in the court of Civil Judge Junior Division/F.T.C.-1 Kaushambi on the basis of compromise deed entered between the parties on 05.03.2025.

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 24.7.2025 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 24.7.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement which is duly verified by the court concerned. It is further submitted that he would have no objection in case criminal proceedings are put to an end. He further submits that in view of settlement there is virtually no chance of any conviction being recorded in the criminal proceedings.

NA528 No. 22812 of 2025

2

Having examined the matter in its totality, this Court is of the view that the criminal proceedings in the present case had essentially been an outcome of a matrimonial dispute and there are no such over bearing circumstances for which the applicants ought to be prosecuted even after the parties has entered into a settlement. Needless to observe that with the present stand of the parties in terms of their settlement, there is practically no chance of recording conviction, even if the case under the F.I.R. in question is put to trial. In other words, entire exercise of trial would only be an exercise in futility. On the contrary, looking to the nature of dispute and the fact that the disputants have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings in question are quashed.

It would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end.

In view of the fact that the parties do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and the fact that matter has been mutually settled between the parties in view of the compromise dated 24.7.2025, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688 , the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

The present application is, accordingly, allowed.

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

September 4, 2025 VMA

Digitally signed by :- VISHWA MOHAN ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad