Ameesh Agrawal and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 33960 of 2025

Ameesh Agrawal And Another

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Agam Jain
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 76

¶6

HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Aklank Jain, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present application has been filed by applicants for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No.1866 of 2007 (Ameesh Agrawal and another Vs. Jamboo Kumar Jain) under Sections 498-A, 342, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Kydganj, District Prayagraj arising out of Case Crime No.236 of 2007 on the basis of compromise dated 19.04.2025 entered into between the parties.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 19.4.2025 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 25.4.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶10

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has not disputed the facts as stated by learned counsel for the applicants. He further contended that opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case against the applicants and the same may be quashed.

¶11

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

¶12

NA528 No. 33960 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

proceedings.

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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 19.4.2025, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶18

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.

¶19

The present application under Section 528 BNSS is, accordingly, allowed .

¶20

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

¶21

September 8, 2025 D. Tamang

¶22

Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ameesh Agrawal and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ameesh Agrawal and Another 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

Smt. Lata Goel vs State of U.P. and Another

Muntajuddin and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra Kumar Alias Jeetu vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Arif and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Bakar vs State of U.P. and Another

Premanshu Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another