Manjur and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Manjur and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 9092 of 2024, the charge sheet dated 03.08.2024 and the cognizance order dated 16.10.2024.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No. 9092 of 2024 (State Vs. Manjur and 7 others), arising out of Case Crime No. 29 of 2024 under Sections 447, 448, 384, 120B I.P.C., along with the charge sheet dated 03.08.2024 and cognizance order dated 16.10.2024, should be quashed in view of the settlement/compromise between the parties.

Court's answer

Pursuant to the co-ordinate Bench direction of 05.08.2025, the court concerned verified the parties' compromise on 01.09.2025; the verified compromise was not disputed by learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.

Ratio / Principle

From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court that cases in which parties have settled their grievances can be quashed, this Court found the present case fit for exercising its powers to quash the proceedings, charge sheet and cognizance order as prayed for by the applicants.

Key takeaways

The application is allowed and the entire proceedings, charge sheet and cognizance order of the aforesaid case (Case No. 9092 of 2024) are quashed.ratio¶¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Tej Pratap Tiwari, J.) allowed an application seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 9092 of 2024 (State Vs. Manjur and 7 others), arising out of Case Crime No. 29 of 2024 under Sections 447, 448, 384, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Bhojpur, District Ghaziabad, together with the charge sheet dated 03.08.2024 and cognizance order dated 16.10.2024 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), F.T.C./Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad. Relying on the settled law enunciated in B.S. Joshi, Nikhil Merchant, Manoj Sharma, Gian Singh, Shaifullah and Parbatbhai Ahir that cases in which parties have settled their grievances can be quashed, and noting that a compromise between the parties had been verified by the court concerned on 01.09.2025 pursuant to a co-ordinate Bench order of 05.08.2025 (undisputed by opposite party no. 2), the Court exercised its quashing power and annulled the proceedings, charge sheet and cognizance order in their entirety.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 5238 of 2025

Manjur And 7 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State Of U.P. And Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Mohd Aamir
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 82

HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.

Vakalatnama filed today by Mohd. Amish on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is taken on record.

Heard Mohd Amir, learned counsel for the applicants, Mohd. Amish, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the records.

The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 9092 of 2024 (State Vs. Manjur and 7 others), arising out of Case Crime No. 29 of 2024, under Sections 447, 448, 384, 120B of I.P.C., Police Station Bhojpur, District Ghaziabad, charge sheet dated 03.08.2024 as well as cognizance order dated 16.10.2024 passed in the aforesaid case, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), F.T.C./Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.

Learned counsel for the applicants states that an order was passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 05.08.2025 directing the applicants to file the said compromise deed before the court concerned which was to be verified by the court concerned. In pursuance of the said order, the court concerned on 01.09.2025 verified the said compromise. Copy of the same is on record. The same is not disputed by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement

NA528 No. 5238 of 2025

2

arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 64 1 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.

From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings, charge sheet as well as cognizance order as prayed for by the applicant(s).

The present application is allowed.

The entire proceedings, charge sheet as well as cognizance order of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.

(Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.)

October 13, 2025 PS

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad