Syed Minhal Abbas Abidi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, Mr Syed Ahmad Abbas Zaidi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the material placed on record.

¶11

3. Instant application has been filed with following prayers:-

¶12

"a) quash the entire impugned proceeding bearing Criminal case No. 117848/2025 namely 'State Vs Syed Minhal Abbas Abidi and others' pending before the Hon'ble Court of A.C.J.M, Room No-27, arising out of case crime No. 51/2025, Under Section 85,115(2) B.N.S 2023 & 3/4 Dowry Prohobition Act 1961, P/S-Talkatora, DistrictLucknow.

¶13

b) quash the charge sheet No. 01/2025 in case crime No. 51/2025, Under Section 85,115(2) B.N.S 2023 & 3/4 Dowry Prohobition Act 1961, P/S- Talkatora, DistrictLucknow.

¶14

c) quash the summoning & cognizance order dated 14/10/2025 passed by the Hon'ble Court of A.C.J.M, Room No-27, Lucknow.

¶15

d) pass such any order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deems, just, fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶16

Also it is prayed that during the meantime the hon'ble court may be pleased to stay the implementation and operation of summoning and cognizance order passed by the

¶17

NA528 No. 1650 of 2026

¶18

2

¶19

Hon'ble Court of A.C.J.M, Room No-27, Lucknow."

¶20

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that due to certain misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. was lodged against the applicants. He added that later on, the parties sat together and have amicably settled their disputes, which has been reduced in writing on 16.01.2026. Thereafter, the applicants filed an Application U/S 482 No.308 of 2026 wherein this Court vide order dated 02.02.2026 has directed the trial court to verify the said compromise deed and in compliance thereof, the compromise deed was verified on 16.02.2026. He submits that now there is no dispute in between the parties and they have settled their dispute. He submits that further criminal proceedings in the instant matter would amount to harassment and, thus, the instant criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶21

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has also supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the opposite party no.2 has no grievance, hence, criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.

¶22

6. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the submissions aforesaid.

¶23

7. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on 16.01.2026 and said compromise has been verified on 16.02.2026 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned criminal proceedings against the applicants.

¶24

8. In view of the above, as the applicants and opposite parties have entered into compromise on 16.01.2026 and no grievance remains to be agitated and, as such, further criminal proceedings in the aforementioned criminal case are liable to be set aside in view of the Judgments of the Apex Court rendered in 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; and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶25

9. Accordingly, entire criminal proceedings against the applicants

¶26

NA528 No. 1650 of 2026

¶27

3

¶28

in Criminal case No. 117848/2025 arising out of case crime No. 51/2025, Under Section 85,115(2) B.N.S 2023 & 3/4 Dowry Prohobition Act 1961, P/S-Talkatora, District-Lucknow, charge sheet No. 01/2025, summoning & cognizance order dated 14/10/2025 are hereby quashed.

¶29

10. The compromise shall be part of this order.

¶30

11. The application is allowed accordingly.

¶31

12. Consigned to the records.

¶32

April 28, 2026

¶33

Mayank

¶34

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶35

Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Syed Minhal Abbas Abidi and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Minhal Abbas Abidi and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. 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

Satish Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Prasad and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sayara Bano vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 6 Others

Pankaj Tiwari and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Mohammad Naim and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Chandesh Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another