Allahabad High Court
Rahul Gupta And 6 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 November, 2025
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:194336
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9930 of 2024
Rahul Gupta And 6 Others
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)
:
Dhiraj Kumar, Romeshwari Prasad
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
Mahendra Kumar Maurya, G.A., Vinod Kumar Bhartiya
Court No. - 86
HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The parties before this Court had made a request that they have entered into a compromise in this matter and have settled all the disputes between them and now they do not want to proceed with this matter. It is further submitted that in compliance of the order of this Court dated 22.10.2024, the compromise has been verified by the Special Judge SC/ST Act Meerut vide order dated 4.12.2024. Further record discloses that verification report dated 4.12.2024 has also been received on record. Further, in compliance of order dated 27.10.2024 passed by this Court, as to whether, the opposite party no.2 has returned the compensation amount received from the authority concerned or not. District Magistrate, Meerut, has submitted its report dated 4.12.2024 stating therein that the opposite party no.2 has not returned the compensation amount to the authority concerned.
3. This appeal has been filed to quash the entire proceedings along with charge sheet dated 30.04.2024 as well as summoning order dated 19.07.2024, in S.T. No.892 of 2024 (State of U.P. v. Rahul Gupta and 6 others) arising out of Case Crime No.0126 of 2024, under Sections 147, 323, 500, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Brahampuri, District- Meerut, pending before the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Meerut, on the basis of compromise between the parties
4. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted before this Court that the compromise entered into between the parties has been made without any coercion or undue influence upon the informant of this case and is a result of free will and consent of the parties.
5. It appears from perusal of the record that the present case is having a nature of purely private dispute and prima facie it also appears that the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim and except some offence under SC/ST Act, minor offences have been levelled against the accused. Further, the compromise between the parties is the result of free will and consent of the informant-opposite party no. 2 without any undue influence.
6. Whether a compromise can be verified and accepted in a case relating to an offence under SC/ST Act has been answered in Ramawatar Vs. State of M.P. (2022) 13 SCC 635. Paragraph no. 17 of the said judgment is quoted herein below:- "17. On the other hand, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a "special statute" would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C."
9. It is further held in paragraph no. 19 of the said judgment which is quoted herein under:- 19. We may hasten to add that in cases such as the present, the Courts ought to be even more vigilant to ensure that the complainant-victim has entered into the compromise on the volition of his/her free will and not on account of any duress. It cannot be understated that since members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe belong to the weaker sections of our country, they are more prone to acts of coercion, and therefore ought to be accorded a higher level of protection. If the Courts find even a hint of compulsion or force, no relief can be given to the accused party. What factors the Courts should consider, would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case".
7. A perusal of the full Bench judgment in Ghulam Rasool Khan And Others vs State Of U.P And Another 2022 (8) ADJ 691 reveals that a matter under the SC/ST Act may be compounded in a criminal appeal under section 14-A(1) of SC/ST Act and there is no need to take recourse of U/s. 482 Cr.P.C. for the same.
8. In view of that, this Court finds that since the parties have entered into compromise which has already been verified by the trial court.
9. Hence, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case emanating from the impugned summoning order dated 19.07.2024, in S.T. No.892 of 2024 (State of U.P. v. Rahul Gupta and 6 others) arising out of Case Crime No.0126 of 2024, under Sections 147, 323, 500, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Brahampuri, District- Meerut, pending before the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Meerut, is hereby quashed and the present criminal appeal is allowed in terms of compromise entered into by both the parties.
10. The opposite party no.2 is directed to returned the compensation amount received from the authority concerned within a week from today.
(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)
November 4, 2025
Krishna*
