Allowed

Priyanka Gangawar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 May 2025NA528/4039/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash complaint proceedings under Sections 323, 392, 504, 506 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute, on the basis of compromise between the parties. The complainant filed an affidavit stating he did not wish to pursue the case; the court quashed the entire proceedings including the summoning order.

What the court decided

AI extract

Priyanka Gangawar and 6 Others Vs State of U.P… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80801

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4039 of 2025 Applicant :- Priyanka Gangawar And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Irfan Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ashiya Parveen, Krishna Kant Yadav,G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Short counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the complainant / opposite party no.2, in Court today, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the complainant / opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This application u/s 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as B.N.S.S.) has been preferred for quashing of the entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 28.10.2022, of Complaint Case No. 202 of 2022 (Vedprakash Vs. Priyanka Gangawar and Others), under Sections - 323, 392, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Kemri, District - Rampur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.) / F.T.C., Rampur, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that matter pertains to matrimonial dispute and both the parties have amicably settled the same and compromised the matter. Both the parties have already filed a petition under Section - 13-B Hindu Marriage Act for grant of divorce on the basis of mutual consent. The complainant / opposite party no.2 does not want to pursue the impugned proceedings against applicants. The opposite party no.2 / complainant has already filed a short counter affidavit, wherein it has been stated that he does not want to proceed with the impugned proceedings. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned proceedings pending and thus, the same may be quashed on the basis of

¶9

compromise between the parties.

¶10

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 / complainant has also concurred with the arguments raised on behalf of the applicants and submitted that both the parties have compromised the matter and now the complainant does not want to pursue the impugned proceedings and the same may be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. It was further submitted that complainant has already submitted short counter affidavit before this Court to the effect that parties have compromised the matter and impugned proceedings may be quashed.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has no objection if parties compromise the matter.

¶12

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

¶13

It is well settled that in appropriate cases criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise. In the instant case, matter relates to matrimonial dispute, which is private in nature. If parties compromise the matter, it would not have adverse impact on society. Both the parties have already filed a petition under Section - 13-B Hindu Marriage Act for grant of divorce on the basis of mutual consent. The complainant has submitted an affidavit before this Court stating that he does not want to proceed with the impugned case against applicants. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties and facts of the matter, it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid, entire impugned proceedings, including summoning order, of the aforesaid complaint case, against applicants, namely, Priyanka Gangawar, Sudheer @ Muneesh, Pradeep, Harprasad, Smt. Javitri Devi, Anita and Sandhya are hereby quashed.

¶15

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶16

Order Date :- 15.5.2025

¶17

S Rawat

¶18

Digitally signed by :- S Rawat SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Priyanka Gangawar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Priyanka Gangawar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases