Kaseem and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

Kaseem and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Entire proceedings of Case No.17130 of 2024 (State of U.P. Vs. Kasim and others) arising out of Case Crime No.13 of 2023, including the cognizance-summoning order dated 02.09.2024 and the charge sheet dated 27.06.2024, quashed in terms of the compromise between the parties.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No.17130 of 2024 (State of U.P. Vs. Kasim and others) arising out of Case Crime No.13 of 2023, including the impugned cognizance-summoning order dated 02.09.2024 and the impugned charge sheet dated 27.06.2024, should be quashed in terms of the compromise entered between the parties.

Court's answer

The criminal proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute; with the parties having settled, there is practically no chance of recording conviction even if the FIR case is put to trial, making the entire trial an exercise in futility, and quashing the proceedings is in the interest of justice.

Ratio / Principle

It would be unfair and contrary to the interest of justice to continue the criminal proceedings; continuation despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer would tantamount to abuse of the process of law, and to secure the ends of justice the criminal case should be put to an end.

Key takeaways

Since the parties do not wish to pursue the case any further and the matter has been mutually settled by compromise dated 27.05.2025, 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 v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688, the proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of FIR proceedings on compromise — Matrimonial dispute — Allahabad High Court allows Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 24984 of 2025 by Kaseem and 6 others: entire proceedings of Case No.17130 of 2024 (State of U.P. Vs. Kasim and others) arising out of FIR Case Crime No.13 of 2023 (Sections 323, 504, 498-A I.P.C.; Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961; Section 3/4 Muslim Women (Rights on Marriage Protection) Act, 2019), Police Station Nai Ki Mandi, District-Agra, along with the impugned cognizance-summoning order dated 02.09.2024 and the impugned charge sheet dated 27.06.2024 pending before the Judicial Magistrate (Junior Division), Court No.06, Agra, are quashed. The Court holds the proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute, subsequently compromised between the parties (compromise dated 27.05.2025, verified by the court concerned on 08.09.2025); with the settlement in place there is practically no chance of conviction, the trial would be an exercise in futility, and continuation would amount to abuse of the process of law. Reliance is placed on the Apex Court decisions in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688. Learned A.G.A. raised no objection. Bench: Vikram D. Chauhan, J.; decided 6 October 2025.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24984 of 2025

Kaseem And 6 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sandeep Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 76

HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

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

This application has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No.17130 of 2024 (State of U.P. Vs. Kasim and others) arising out of Case Crime No.13 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 3/4 Muslim Women (Rights on Marriage Protection) Act, 2019, Police Station Nai Ki Mandi, District-Agra as well as impugned cognizance-summoning order dated 02.09.2024 under Sections 323, 504, 498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 3/4 Muslim Women (Rights on Marriage Protection) Act, 2019 against the applicant No. 1 and under Section 498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against applicant Nos. 2 to 7 as well as impugned charge sheet dated 27.06.2024, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate (Junior Division), Court No.06, Agra in terms of compromise entered between the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 27.05.2025 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 08.09.2025, 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. 24984 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 27.05.2025, 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 under Section 528 BNSS is, accordingly, allowed . October 6, 2025 Gurpreet Singh

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

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