Muzaffar and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Muzaffar and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Entire proceedings of Case no. 396 of 2015 (Converted Case no. 81/2025) (State Vs. Muzaffar & others) arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2015, under sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Premnagar, District Bareilly, pending before the Civil Judge (S.D./F.T.C.), District Bareilly, quashed, encompassing the charge sheet dated 19.02.2015 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 21.09.2015; the concerned Court directed not to proceed further.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings in Case no. 396 of 2015 (Converted Case no. 81/2025) arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2015, together with the charge sheet dated 19.02.2015 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 21.09.2015, should be quashed in view of the compromise reached between the parties.

Court's answer

In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, duly verified by the Additional Civil Judge (SD)-7, Bareilly, and taking into consideration the provisions of Section 528 BNSS, the Court deemed it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to exercise its inherent jurisdiction.

Ratio / Principle

The entire proceedings of Case no. 396 of 2015 (Converted Case no. 81/2025) (State Vs. Muzaffar & others) arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2015, under sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Premnagar, District Bareilly, pending before the Civil Judge (S.D./F.T.C.), District Bareilly, are quashed, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the precedents cited (B.S. Joshi; Gian Singh; Shambhu Kewat; Deepak; Manish; J. Ramesh Kamath; Rajveer Singh; Parbatbhai Ahir).

Key takeaways

The concerned Court is directed not to proceed with the case, as the matter has already been settled by the parties on the basis of compromise.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal proceedings in Case no. 396 of 2015 (Converted Case no. 81/2025) (State Vs. Muzaffar & others), arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2015 under sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Premnagar, District Bareilly, pending before the Civil Judge (S.D./F.T.C.), District Bareilly — quashed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS, on the strength of a compromise between the parties duly verified by the Additional Civil Judge (SD)-7, Bareilly vide report/order dated 25.04.2025; the charge sheet dated 19.02.2015 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 21.09.2015 of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, District Bareilly formed part of the proceedings quashed; concerned Court directed not to proceed with the case as the dispute stood settled on the basis of compromise; reliance placed on Supreme Court rulings including B.S. Joshi (2003) 4 SCC 675, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303, State of Rajasthan v. Shambhu Kewat (2014) 4 SCC 149, State of M.P. v. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285, State of M.P. v. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307, J. Ramesh Kamath (2016) 12 SCC 179, State of M.P. v. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir (2017) 9 SCC 641.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7293 of 2025

Muzaffar And 4 Others

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Mohammad Waseem
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Rajesh Kumar Verma, G.A.

Court No. - 82

HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.

Heard Mr. Mohammad Waseem, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rajesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and Sri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he has filed this application under Section 528 BNSS with the relief which has been mentioned in the prayer clause of the application.

The relief which has been mentioned in the present application is delineated below:-

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the entire proceeding as well as impugned charge sheet dated 19.02.2015 as well as Cognizance /Summoning order dated 21.09.2015 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, District Bareilly on the basis of compromise in Case no. 396 of 2015 (Converted Case no. 81/2025 ) (State Vs. Muzaffar & others) Arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2015, under section, 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police StationPremnagar, District -Bareilly Pending in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D./F.T.C.), District Bareilly."

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that both the parties have entered into compromise and have settled the dispute amicably out of the

NA528 No. 7293 of 2025

2

Court. Learned counsel for opposite party No.2 submits that the informant also does not want to proceed with the criminal case.

This Court, vide order dated 5.3.2025, directed both the parties to appear before the concerned court within six weeks for verification of the compromise and the concerned Court was directed to verify same. The applicants were also directed by this Court to file certified copy of the compromise as well as verification report by the next date of listing.

In compliance of the order of this Court, both the parties appeared before the Additional Civil Judge (SD) -7, Bareilly and the concerned Court has verified the compromise vide report/order dated 25.04.2025. The compromise report/order dated 25.04.2025 has been annexed as Annexure No.SA (1) of the supplementary affidavit filed by the applicants.

Therefore, in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, which has been duly verified by the Additional Civil Judge (SD) -7, Bareilly, and taking into consideration the provisions of Sections 528 BNSS, this Court, in the interest of justice, deems it appropriate to exercise its inherent jurisdiction.

In view of the above, the entire proceedings of Case no. 396 of 2015 (Converted Case no. 81/2025 ) (State Vs. Muzaffar & others) Arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2015, under section, 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Premnagar, District -Bareilly Pending in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D./F.T.C.), District Bareilly, are quashed, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi and Others vs. State of Haryana and Another, (2003) 4 SCC 675; Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak, (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish, (2015) 8 SCC 307; J. Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup, (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh, (2016) 12 SCC 471; and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641 and the concerned Court is directed not to proceed with the case as the matter has already been settled by the parties on the basis of compromise.

NA528 No. 7293 of 2025

3

Accordingly, this application stands allowed.

(Praveen Kumar Giri,J.)

November 18, 2025 DKS

Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR SRIVASTWA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad