Allahabad High Court
Pankaj Verma And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 31 July, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:128033 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9142 of 2024 Applicant :- Pankaj Verma And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Sen Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shikher Trivedi Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Gajendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This application has been filed for quashing the cognizance order dated 12.6.2019 and summoning order 12.07.2019, as well as, entire proceeding in Case No.1195 of 2019 of charge-sheet No.41/19 submitted on 16.3.2019 against applicants arising out of Case Crime No.150 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Bivar District – Hamirpur pending in the Court of Civil Judge ( Junior Division)/ F.T.C. (Crime against women) Hamirpur.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants has produced two original demand drafts of Rs. 8,00,000/- as has been detailed at page-8 of the supplementary affidavit dated 16.05.2025 filed by learned counsel for the applicants and handed over the same to the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has received aforesaid two original demand drafts amounting to Rs. 8,00,000/-.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 29.04.2025 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 29.04.2025, therefore, the present case be finally decided.
6. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has not disputed the facts as stated by learned counsel for the applicants. He further contended that opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case against the applicants and the same may be quashed.
7. Learned counsels for the respective parties submit that as per para-3 of the supplementary affidavit criminal cases are pending between the parties in which withdrawal applications has been filed for withdrawal of the aforesaid cases. Details of the cases are as follows:
A. Case No.1195 of 2019 (State vs. Pankaj Verma and others), under Sections 498A pending before learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (Crime against women) Hamirpur;
B. Complaint Case No.1300 of 2018 (Rama Devi vs. Pankaj Verma and others) pending before Civil Judge (Junior Division) under Section 12 of Women Domestic Violence Act;
C. Complaint Case No.120 of 2019 (Rama Devi vs. Ram Swaroop Verma and another) pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate – Hamirpur, under Section 120-B/376 IPC;
D. Criminal Case No.258 of 2018 (Rama Devi vs. Pankaj Verma pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur, under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
8. Learned counsels for both the parties submit that aforesaid cases may stand withdrawn by the present order itself.
8-A. In view of the said submission, the cases mentioned in para-7 of the present order shall stand withdrawn.
9. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement which is duly verified by the court concerned. It is further submitted that he would have no objection in case criminal proceedings are put to an end. He further submits that in view of settlement there is virtually no chance of any conviction being recorded in the criminal proceedings.
10. Having examined the matter in its totality, this Court is of the view that the criminal proceedings in the present case had essentially been an outcome of a matrimonial dispute; and there are no such over bearing circumstances for which the applicants ought to be prosecuted even after the parties has entered into a settlement. Needless to observe that with the present stand of the parties in terms of their settlement, there is practically no chance of recording conviction, even if the case under the F.I.R. in question is put to trial. In other words, entire exercise of trial would only be an exercise in futility. On the contrary, looking to the nature of dispute and the fact that the disputants have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings in question are quashed.
11. It would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end.
12. In view of the fact that the parties do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and the fact that matter has been mutually settled between the parties in view of the compromise dated 19.04.2025, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.
13. Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, the proceedings of the aforesaid cases (as detailed in paras-2 and 7 of the present order) is hereby quashed.
14. The present application is, accordingly, allowed.
15. A copy of this order shall be placed before the court concerned, which shall pass a formal order for withdrawal of the cases.
Order Date :- 31.7.2025
S.Prakash