Kayum and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2026)

Kayum and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the summoning order dated 28.10.2023 and the entire and all consequential proceedings of Criminal Complaint No.27646 of 2022 (Smt. Gulshan vs. Kayum and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, qua the applicants.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 28.10.2023 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Complaint No.27646 of 2022 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are liable to be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

The application is allowed and the entire and all consequential proceedings of Criminal Complaint No.27646 of 2022 (Smt. Gulshan vs. Kayum and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi, are quashed qua the applicants.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of criminal proceedings on compromise — Application U/S 482 allowed (Brij Raj Singh, J., May 19, 2026) — Mediation and Conciliation Center, High Court, Lucknow reported settlement dated 7.5.2026; dispute under the agreement stands settled amicably between the parties — matter purely of personal nature, mutually settled; parties do not want to pursue the case; no useful purpose would be served in proceeding further — summoning order dated 28.10.2023 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi and the entire and all consequential proceedings of Criminal Complaint No.27646 of 2022 (Smt. Gulshan vs. Kayum and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi quashed qua the applicants — reliance placed on B.S. Joshi, Nikhil Merchant, Manoj Sharma, Gian Singh, Narindra Singh, State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan and Parbatbhai Aahir; no objection by counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned AGA recorded.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9594 of 2025

Kayum And 3 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Onkar Nath Nishad, Deepak Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Awadhesh Kumar Pal

Court No. - 15

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By means of present application, the applicant has prayed for quashing of the impugned summoning order dated 28.10.2023 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi in Criminal Complaint No.27646 of 2022 (Smt. Gulshan vs. Kayum and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Complaint No.27646 of 2022, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi.

The Mediation and Conciliation Center, High Court, Lucknow has submitted its report dated 7.5.2026 along with the settlement entered into between the parties. According to the terms of the compromise, parties have settled their dispute amicably.

Learned counsel for the parties state that the dispute under the said agreement stands settled between the parties. Therefore, submission is that the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are liable to be quashed.

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 applicants

A482 No. 9594 of 2025

2

in the aforesaid case are quashed. Learned AGA also has no objection.

The 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 and all consequential proceedings of Criminal Complaint No.27646 of 2022 (Smt. Gulshan vs. Kayum and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi, are hereby quashed qua the applicants.

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

May 19, 2026

Sachin

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench