Allahabad High Court
Shaphik Ahmed And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 14 October, 2025
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:183849
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10611 of 2024
Shaphik Ahmed And 2 Others
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)
:
Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
G.A., Niyaj Ahamad
Court No. - 86
HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, 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 31.01.2025, the compromise has been verified by the Special Judge SC/ST Act Amroha vide order dated 10.03.2025. Further record discloses that verification report has also been received on record.
3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act has been filed for quashing the cognizance/summoning order dated 10.01.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Saharanpur as well as Charge Sheet dated 22.11.2021 in Session Case No. 31 of 2022 (State Vs. Shaphik Ahmad and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 118 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C., Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 3(2)5A SC/ST, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Saharanpur.
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. 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."
6. 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 orders dated 10.01.2022 and 22.11.2021 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Saharanpur in Session Case No. 31 of 2022 (State Vs. Shaphik Ahmad and others) arising out of Case Crime No.118 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C., Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 3(2)5A SC/ST, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Saharanpur is hereby quashed.
10. The instant criminal appeal is disposed of in terms of compromise entered into by both the parties.
(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)
October 14, 2025
Ajeet
