Mishri Lal and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Mishri Lal and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.3556 of 2024, State Vs. Mishri Lal, arising out of Case Crime No.190 of 1996, under Section 363 IPC, Police Station Baldirai, District Sultanpur, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.20, Sultanpur, qua the applicant(s).

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.3556 of 2024 (arising out of Case Crime No.190 of 1996, under Section 363 IPC, P.S. Baldirai, District Sultanpur) can be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties, notwithstanding the AGA's submission that the prosecutrix was a minor at the relevant time.

Court's answer

Since the parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter is purely of personal nature and has been mutually settled by way of compromise, and the applicants no.1 and 2 are living as husband and wife, having married 30 years ago with their children also married, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter any further; the Court's inherent power may accordingly be invoked (as per the Supreme Court precedents relied upon) to end the criminal proceedings on the basis of the settlement.

Ratio / Principle

The application is allowed and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.3556 of 2024, State Vs. Mishri Lal, arising out of Case Crime No.190 of 1996, under Section 363 IPC, Police Station Baldirai, District Sultanpur, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.20, Sultanpur, are quashed qua the applicant(s).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) [Brij Raj Singh, J.] — Application U/S 482 allowed; criminal proceedings quashed on compromise. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.3556 of 2024 (State Vs. Mishri Lal), arising out of Case Crime No.190 of 1996 under Section 363 IPC, Police Station Baldirai, District Sultanpur, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.20, Sultanpur, were quashed qua the applicants. The parties had entered into a compromise on 15.11.2025; verification was directed by this Court on 28.01.2026 and effected by the trial court on 23.02.2026. The applicants no.1 and 2 are living as husband and wife, having married 30 years ago, with their children also married; the matter was found to be purely of personal nature. Reliance was placed on B.S. Joshi, Nikhil Merchant, Manoj Sharma, Gian Singh, Narindra Singh, State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan and Parbatbhai Aahir. Notwithstanding the AGA's objection that the prosecutrix was minor at the relevant time, the Court held that no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2286 of 2026

Mishri Lal And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sachin Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 16

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s), learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no.1 and Sri Rajneesh Tiwari, learned counsels appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2.

The present application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.3556 of 2024, State Vs. Mishri Lal, arising out of Case Crime No.190 of 1996, under Section 363 IPC, Police Station Baldirai, District Sultanpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.20, Sultanpur.

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 28.01.2026 given a direction to the trial court to verify the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties on 15.11.2025. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the trial court has verified the contents of compromise vide order dated 23.02.2026. Counsel for the applicants further submits that applicants no.1 and 2 are living as husband and wife and they have married 30 years ago and their children are also married.

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

A482 No. 2286 of 2026

2

Learned AGA has submitted that at the relevant time, the prosecutrix was minor, therefore, the proceedings cannot be quashed. However, he has not denied the factum of compromise entered between the parties.

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, and also the fact that applicants no.1 and 2 are living as husband and wife and they have married 30 years ago and their children are also married, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter any further.

Application is accordingly allowed and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.3556 of 2024, State Vs. Mishri Lal, arising out of Case Crime No.190 of 1996, under Section 363 IPC, Police Station Baldirai, District Sultanpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.20, Sultanpur, 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