Allowed¶19

Rahul Saxena Alias Monu and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Oct 2025NA528/41567/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of 498-A IPC / Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act complaint proceedings on basis of compromise between parties; matrimonial dispute; settlement dated 9.12.2024 verified 8.1.2025; AGA no objection; abuse of process; inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS; Allahabad High Court; Shahjahanpur/Powayan; reliance on Parbatbhai Aahir, Gian Singh, Laxmi Narayan.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 528 BNSS allowed; summoning order dated 10.01.2020 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 88 of 2019 quashed. ¶19

Rahul Saxena Alias Monu and 7 Others Vs State of U.P… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application under Section 528 BNSS allowed; summoning order dated 10.01.2020 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 88 of 2019 quashed.

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 10.01.2020 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 88 of 2019 under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act ought to be quashed in view of the settlement/compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶10

Court's answer

The criminal proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute; there were no overbearing circumstances warranting prosecution after the parties entered into a settlement, there was practically no chance of conviction, the trial would be an exercise in futility, and quashing was in the interest of justice.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

Continuation of the criminal proceeding despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer would tantamount to abuse of process of law, and putting the criminal case to an end was appropriate to secure the ends of justice.

¶16

Key takeaways

Since the parties did not wish to pursue the case and the matter was mutually settled in view of the compromise dated 9.12.2024, 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, Gian Singh and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 88 of 2019 were quashed.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Vikram D. Chauhan, J.) allowed an application under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 10.01.2020 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 88 of 2019 (Smt. Parisha Saxena Vs. Rahul Saxena alias Monu and others) pending before the Civil Judge, Junior Division/Judicial Magistrate, Powayan, Shahjahanpur under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The parties had entered into a compromise on 9.12.2024, verified by the court on 8.1.2025, and the learned AGA raised no objection, submitting there was virtually no chance of conviction. Holding that the criminal proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute, that continuance despite settlement would amount to abuse of process, and that trial would be an exercise in futility, the Court relied 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 and quashed the proceedings.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41567 of 2025

¶3

Rahul Saxena Alias Monu And 7 Others

¶4

.....Applicant(s) Versus

¶5

State of U.P. and Another

¶6

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arpit Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 76

¶8

HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

¶9

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

¶10

The present application has been filed by the applicants for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 10.01.2020 passed by the court of Judicial Magistrate, Puwaya, Shahjahanpur in Complaint Case No. 88 of 2019 (Smt. Parisha Saxena Vs. Rahul Saxena alias Monu and others) along with the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 88 of 2019 (Smt. Parisha Saxena Vs. Rahul Saxena alias Monu and others) pending in the court of Civil Judge, Junior Division/Judicial Magistrate, Powayan, Shahjahanpur under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Powayan, Shahjahanpur.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 9.12.2024 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 8.1.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶12

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.

¶13

NA528 No. 41567 of 2025

¶14

¶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 9.12.2024, 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 is, accordingly, allowed.

¶20

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

¶21

October 29, 2025 VMA

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VISHWA MOHAN ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul Saxena Alias Monu and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Saxena Alias Monu and 7 Others 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