Gopi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Gopi and 2 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. 3996 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 135 of 2023, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings in Case No. 3996 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 135 of 2023 (Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act), should be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

The criminal proceedings were essentially an outcome of a matrimonial dispute; with the parties having entered into a settlement, there are no overbearing circumstances warranting continued prosecution of the applicants.

Ratio / Principle

With the parties' settlement in place there is practically no chance of recording conviction and the entire trial would only be an exercise in futility; since the close-relative disputants have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, quashing would be in the interest of justice.

Key takeaways

Continuation of the criminal proceeding despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer would tantamount to abuse of process of law; to secure the ends of justice the criminal case should be put to an end.ratio¶12
As the parties do not want to pursue the case any further and the matter has been mutually settled by the compromise dated 10.06.2024, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.ratio¶13
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. v. Laxmi Narayan, the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allowed — Application under Section 528 BNSS; quashing of criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise between the parties. The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Vikram D. Chauhan, J.) quashed the entire proceedings of Case No. 3996 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 135 of 2023 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Crossing Republic, District Ghaziabad, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad. The parties had entered into a compromise on 10.06.2024, verified by the court concerned on 07.04.2025; the learned AGA did not dispute the settlement, raised no objection, and conceded there was virtually no chance of conviction. Holding the prosecution to be essentially the outcome of a matrimonial dispute between close relatives who had compromised and wished to proceed peacefully, that the trial would be an exercise in futility, and that continuation despite settlement would tantamount to abuse of process of law, the Court — invoking the settled principles in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688 — quashed the proceedings and allowed the application. Order dated 7.8.2025.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:134086

Court No. - 76

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7353 of 2025

Applicant :- Gopi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Ali Imam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

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

The present application has been filed by applicants for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 3996 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 135 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Crossing Republic, District Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghaziabad, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 10.06.2024 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 07.04.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

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.

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 being the close relatives, have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings in question are quashed.

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.

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 10.06.2024, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

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.

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

Order Date :- 7.8.2025 SK Srivastava

Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad