Rahul Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7624 of 2025

Rahul Yadav And 5 Others

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Jitendra Singh, Sunil Kumar Pandey : G.A., Uttam Singh

¶5

Court No. - 75

¶6

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶7

1. List revised.

¶8

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Uttam Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

¶9

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants Rahul Yadav, Omkar Yadav, Lilawati Devi, Sarvesh Yadav, Priyanka Yadav, Vivekanand Yadav, with the prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet no. 516 of 2024, dated 08.11.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 19.12.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 659 of 2025, State vs. Rahul Yadav and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 447 of 2024, u/s 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.- Ramgarh Tal, District Gorakhpur, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of said case during pendency of this application.

¶10

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 30.4.2025 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶11

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 23.8.2025 the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶12

NA528 No. 7624 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

As per the office report dated 26.3.2026, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record which states that mediation between the parties is successful.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicants argued that parties have settled the dispute amicably before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and therefore the impugned proceedings, charge sheet, cognizance/summoning order be quashed on the ground of settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶16

Learned counsels for the applicants and the opposite party no. 2 state that the case under Section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act has been decided by the concerned Family Court on 23.4.2026.

¶17

Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 could not dispute the factum of compromise between the parties which is on record.

¶18

From perusal of the report of Mediation Centre of this Court, it appears that in pursuance of the said order the mediation proceedings were taken up which ended in a settlement dated 23.8.2025 between the parties subject to the terms and conditions mentioned therein and the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising in the present matter. The parties have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in para 7(f) of the said mediation report.

¶19

The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.

¶20

NA528 No. 7624 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the impugned proceedings, charge sheet, cognizance/summoning order as prayed for by the applicants.

¶23

The present application is allowed.

¶24

The impugned proceedings, charge sheet, cognizance/summoning order in the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.

¶25

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶26

May 5, 2026 Naresh

¶27

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

Rahul Yadav and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Yadav and 5 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

Rizwan vs State of U.P. and Another

Muskan Khan and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shakeel @ Shakeel Ahmad and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Premchand Maurya Vs State of U.P through Its Principal Secretary (Home) and Another

Rajpal Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Maheshwari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another