Bhupendra Alias Monu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

Bhupendra Alias Monu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Proceedings of Case no. 16891 of 2023 (arising out of Case Crime No. 141 of 2022), including the charge-sheet dated 30.06.2023 and cognizance order dated 01.08.2023, were quashed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge-sheet dated 30.06.2023 and cognizance order dated 01.08.2023 in Case no. 16891 of 2023 (arising out of Case Crime No. 141 of 2022) should be quashed in view of the compromise entered between the parties on 28.05.2025 and verified by the court concerned on 30.07.2025.

Ratio / Principle

This Court held that the criminal proceedings in the present case had essentially been an outcome of a matrimonial dispute, with no overbearing circumstances warranting prosecution of the applicants once the parties had entered into a settlement.

Key takeaways

With the parties' settlement in place, there was practically no chance of recording conviction even if the case arising from the FIR were put to trial, and the entire exercise of trial would only be an exercise in futility.ratio¶12
Continuation of the criminal proceeding despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer would be unfair, contrary to the interest of justice, and tantamount to abuse of the process of law; to secure the ends of justice it is appropriate that the criminal case be put to an end.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Vikram D. Chauhan, J.), decision dated September 22, 2025: Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 25467 of 2025 (Bhupendra alias Monu and 2 others v. State of U.P. and another) allowed, and the charge-sheet dated 30.06.2023 and cognizance order dated 01.08.2023 in Case no. 16891 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 141 of 2022 (Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending before Civil Judge (Junior Division) FTC Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar), were quashed. Grounds: parties had entered a compromise on 28.05.2025 verified on 30.07.2025; the proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute with no overbearing circumstances justifying prosecution post-settlement; conviction was practically impossible and trial would be an exercise in futility; continuance despite settlement and compromise between victim and wrongdoer would amount to abuse of the process of law; quashing effected in view of the Apex Court principles 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.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25467 of 2025

Bhupendra Alias Monu And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) Versus State Of U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar, Vinod Kumar Tirpathi 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.

This application has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 30.06.2023, as well as, cognizance order dated 01.08.2023, In Case no. 16891 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 141 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, I.P.C., and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending before Civil Judge (Junior Division) FTC Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar.

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 28.05.2025 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 30.07.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have

NA528 No. 25467 of 2025

2

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.

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 28.05.2025, 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.

NA528 No. 25467 of 2025

3

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 .

September 22, 2025 S.Prakash

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

Digitally signed by :- SHASHI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad