Allowed¶15

Anuj Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2025NA528/30277/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of criminal proceedings/FIR consequences on basis of compromise and settlement between parties in a matrimonial dispute; Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act; Case Crime No. 44 of 2019, P.S. Shahganj, Prayagraj; inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS; abuse of process; ends of justice; Parbatbhai Aahir (2017) 9 SCC 641; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688; Anuj Shukla v. State of U.P.; Allahabad High Court 2025; application allowed.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceeding, charge-sheet dated 23.07.2020 and cognizance/summoning order dated 17.12.2020 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No.7, Allahabad, in Case No.1851 of 2020 (State Vs. Anuj Shukla), arising out of Case Crime No. 44 of 2019, quashed; application under Section 528 BNSS allowed. ¶15

Anuj Shukla Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceeding, together with the charge-sheet dated 23.07.2020 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 17.12.2020 in Case No.1851 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 44 of 2019, should be quashed in view of the compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶7

Court's answer

The criminal proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute, and with the parties having settled, there is practically no chance of conviction; the trial would be an exercise in futility and it would be in the interest of justice to quash the proceedings.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

Continuation of the criminal proceeding despite the settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer would tantamount to abuse of process of law; to secure the ends of justice the criminal case should be put to an end.

¶12

Key takeaways

Since the parties do not wish to pursue the case and the matter stands mutually settled in terms of the compromise dated 17.03.2025, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding further with the matter.ratio¶13
In view of the well-settled principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688, the proceedings of Case No.1851 of 2020 are quashed.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Vikram D. Chauhan, J.; order dated 19.8.2025) allowed an application under Section 528 BNSS and quashed the entire criminal proceeding, charge-sheet dated 23.07.2020 and cognizance/summoning order dated 17.12.2020 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No.7, Allahabad, in Case No.1851 of 2020 (State Vs. Anuj Shukla), arising out of Case Crime No. 44 of 2019 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Shahganj, District Prayagraj. The dispute was found to be essentially matrimonial in nature; the parties had compromised on 17.03.2025 (verified 15.05.2025), the learned AGA raised no objection, and continuance after settlement was held to tantamount to abuse of process of law, the trial being an exercise in futility. Reliance was placed on 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.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140783

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30277 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Anuj Shukla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satyakam Dubey,Suneel Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This application has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding as well as charge-sheet dated 23.07.2020 along with cognizance/summoning order dated 17.12.2020 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No.7, Allahabad, in Case No.1851 of 2020, (State Vs. Anuj Shukla), arising out of Case Crime No. 44 of 2019, Under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Shahganj, Distric Prayagraj.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 17.03.2025 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 15.05.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶9

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.

¶10

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

¶11

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.

¶12

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.

¶13

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 17.03.2025, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶14

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.

¶15

The present application is, accordingly, allowed .

¶16

Order Date :- 19.8.2025 S.Prakash

¶17

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

Anuj Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

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