Mahendra Prasad Pandey and Another vs State of U.P… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2026)

Mahendra Prasad Pandey and Another vs State of U.P… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No.1606 of 2015, State Vs. Mahendra Prasad Pandey and another, arising out of Case Crime No.69 of 1999, under Sections 498A, 494, 493, 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri, pending in the court of ACJM, Court No.4, Lakhimpur Kheri, qua the applicants.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings in Case No.1606 of 2015 (State Vs. Mahendra Prasad Pandey and another), arising out of Case Crime No.69 of 1999 under Sections 498A, 494, 493, 406, 504, 506 IPC, should be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

Where the dispute is purely of a personal nature and has been mutually settled between the parties by way of compromise, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the criminal proceedings further, and the Court may exercise its inherent power to quash them, following the Supreme Court precedents on quashing upon compromise.

Ratio / Principle

Application allowed; the entire proceedings of Case No.1606 of 2015, State Vs. Mahendra Prasad Pandey and another, arising out of Case Crime No.69 of 1999, under Sections 498A, 494, 493, 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri, pending in the court of ACJM, Court No.4, Lakhimpur Kheri, are quashed qua the applicants.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal quashing — inherent jurisdiction (Application U/S 482 No. - 2282 of 2026, Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Brij Raj Singh, J.) — entire proceedings of Case No.1606 of 2015, State Vs. Mahendra Prasad Pandey and another, arising out of Case Crime No.69 of 1999, under Sections 498A, 494, 493, 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri, pending before ACJM, Court No.4, Lakhimpur Kheri, quashed qua the applicants — parties entered into compromise dated 24.12.2025 and did not wish to pursue the case; High Court by order dated 16.02.2026 directed the trial court to verify the compromise; trial court verified it vide order dated 24.02.2026; counsel for opposite party no.2 raised no objection and learned A.G.A. conceded the compromise was effected and duly verified — dispute purely of personal nature, mutually settled; no useful purpose in continuing proceedings — reliance placed on Supreme Court authority on quashing upon settlement: B.S. Joshi (2003) 4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant (2008) 9 SCC 677; Manoj Sharma (2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narindra Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466; State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan AIR 2019 SC 1296; Parbatbhai Aahir (2017) 9 SCC 641 — application allowed, March 17, 2026.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2282 of 2026

Mahendra Prasad Pandey And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aman Kumar Shrivastav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Suraj Singh Visen

Court No. - 16

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s), learned A.G.A. for the Stateopposite party no.1 and Sri Suraj Singh Visen, learned counsel, who has filed power on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.

The present application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No.1606 of 2015, State Vs. Mahendra Prasad Pandey and another, arising out of Case Crime No.69 of 1999, under Sections 498A, 494, 493, 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri, pending in the court of ACJM, Court No.4, Lakhimpur Kheri.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that parties do not want to pursue the case any further and they have entered into compromise. He further submits that this Court vide order dated 16.02.2026 given a direction to the trial court to verify the factum of compromise dated 24.12.2025 arrived at between the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the trial court has verified the contents of compromise vide order dated 24.02.2026.

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has also not denied the aforesaid facts. On instructions received from opposite party no.2, he submits that he has no objection, if the proceedings against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case are quashed on the basis of the compromise.

Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the trial court.

A482 No. 2282 of 2026

2

Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the question of quashing the criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties has held that the Court can use its inherent power to do real and substantial justice and to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties in the cases of B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003)4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2008) 9 SCC 677; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466; State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296 and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641 .

In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further; the matter is purely of personal nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

Application is accordingly allowed and the entire proceedings of Case No.1606 of 2015, State Vs. Mahendra Prasad Pandey and another, arising out of Case Crime No.69 of 1999, under Sections 498A, 494, 493, 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri, pending in the court of ACJM, Court No.4, Lakhimpur Kheri, are hereby quashed qua the applicant( s).

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

March 17, 2026

Rao/-

Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench