Adil and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2026A482/26910/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; Application U/S 482 No. 26910 of 2021; Chawan Prakash, J.; quashing of proceedings on compromise; Sections 323, 504, 506, 307, 328, 354 IPC; Case Crime No. 737 of 2018; P.S. Kharkhauda, District Meerut; Case No. 4887 of 2019; ACJM Court No. IV Meerut; compromise verification order dated 29.04.2022; Narindra Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466; Parbatbhai Aahir (2017) 9 SCC 641; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688; Shaifullah 2013 (83) ACC 278; non-compoundable offences; cognizable offences; amicable settlement; prosecution withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings of Case No. 4887 of 2019 (State Vs. Adil and others) under Sections 323, 504, 506, 307, 328, 354 I.P.C. quashed in terms of the compromise between the parties. ¶¶17

Adil and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26910 of 2021

¶3

Adil And 7 Others

¶4

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Mukesh Chandra Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 79

¶6

HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Mukesh Chandra Gupta, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 4887 of 2019 (State Vs. Adil and others), under Sections 323, 504, 506, 307, 328, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Kharkhauda, District Meerut, arising out of Case Crime No. 737 of 2018, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. IV, District Meerut, on the basis of compromise dated 16.10.2021.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicant approached this Court by filing this 482 Cr.P.C. application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, this Court vide order dated 14.02.2022 directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 29.04.2022 verified the parties as well as compromise application. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled their dispute through compromise and, as such, opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicant. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicant and in view of the

¶10

A482 No. 26910 of 2021

¶11

¶12

compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

¶13

Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

¶14

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai 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 Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non-compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.

¶16

Accordingly, entire proceedings of aforesaid case, are hereby quashed in terms of compromise dated 16.10.2022.

¶17

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed.

¶18

(Chawan Prakash,J.)

¶19

April 27, 2026 v.k. updh.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Adil and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adil and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ankit Dwivedi and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Gulam Rasool and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajaruddin @ Salman Audi vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhilesh Singh @ Mallu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shainky Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar Patel and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others