Allahabad High Court
Naved Ahmad And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 October, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:177969
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38444 of 2025
Naved Ahmad And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Balbir Yadav, Mohd Salman
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 79
Sl. No. 40
HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
1. Heard Shri Balbir Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant application under section 528 BNSS has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No 509 of 2019 (State Vs. Naved Ahmad and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 392 of 2018 under sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 police station Saini District Kaushambi pending before the C.J.M. Kaushambi in view of the compromise dated 6.6.2024 executed between the parties and verified by the trial court vide order dated 10.2.2025.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that earlier the applicants herein have filed an application U/s 528 BNSS No. 34264 of 2024 (Naved Ahmad and others Vs. State of U.P. and another), which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 4.12.2024. The order dated 4.12.2024 reads as under:
"Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 has been filed by Mr. S.M. Muzammil Mahmood and Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocates today, which is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Ainul Haq, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Anuj Kumr, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 21.11.2018 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 509 of 2019 (State Vs. Naved Ahmad & others), arising out of Case Crime No. 392 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Saini, District Kaushambi, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi on the basis of compromise deed entered between the parties.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them. After the aforesaid, applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2 have decided to separate each other. In this regard, an application alongwith compromise deed on behalf of both the parties has been filed before the court below stating therein that they have entered into compromise and they do not want to press the case, copy of said application has been annexed as Annexure no.3 to this application. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the court below and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of the process of law.
Learned AGA, however, submits that it is the concerned court below, which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicants may approach the concerned court below and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law.
In view of the above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with an application for verification of the compromise deed as well as a certified copy of this order. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from today. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statement of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not?
The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of."
4. In terms of the aforesaid order, the parties had appeared before the trial court for verification of the compromise and before the trial court statement of opposite party no. 2 as well as all the applicants were recorded by the trial court and thereafter the said compromise was verified by the trial court vide order dated 10.2.2025. The certified copies of the statements so recorded for verification of the compromise by the trial as well as the certified copy of the compromise alongwith the verification order dated 10.2.2025 passed by the C.J.M. Kaushambi have also been annexed as Annexure-5 to the instant application. In view of the aforesaid fact, learned counsel for the applicants seeks quashing of the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case.
5. Learned A.G.A. in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances does not oppose the prayer for quashing of the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case.
6. Having heard the submissions so made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the record of the case. From the record of the case, it is apparent that due to matrimonial dispute between the parties, the alleged incident is stated to have been occurred. The opposite party no. 2 had initially filed an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 15.2.2018 before the C.J.M. Kaushambi and as per the direction issued by the court, the FI.R. was registered on 28.6.2018 being Case Crime No. 392 of 2018 against the applicants herein. During the pendency of the aforesaid case, the parties have settled all their dispute amicably and compromise has also been executed between the parties, which has also been duly verified by the trial court concerned in pursuance of the order of this court. Thus since the dispute was matrimonial in nature and in view of the compromise entered into between the parties, there is remote and bleak chances of conviction of the applicants herein. With the aforesaid settlement, the peace will prevail in the society and continuance of the aforesaid criminal proceedings will not serve any fruitful purpose in view of the settlement of disputes between parties.
6. In view of the aforesaid facts and in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court in Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 : Prabatbhai Aahir Alias Prabatbhai Bhimsinghbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and Another , (2017) 9 SCC 641 and Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the instant application deserves to be allowed.
7. In view thereof, the instant application is accordingly allowed and the proceedings of Case No 509 of 2019 (State Vs. Naved Ahmad and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 392 of 2018 under sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 police station Saini District Kaushambi pending before the C.J.M. Kaushambi are hereby quashed.
(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)
October 7, 2025
o.k.
