HIMANSHU @ HIMANSHU CHAUDHARY AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
NA528/32567/2025 · 2025-10-13
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 190974 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 190974 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32567 of 2025 Court No. - 79 HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
1. Heard Peeyush Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Kamlesh Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 2359 of 2025 (wrongly printed as 2359/2024 on the order sheet) (State versus Himanshu and others) under Sections 115(2), 85, 352 B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Highway, District Mathura, arising out of the Charge Sheet dated 20.11.2024 in connection with the Case Crime No. 1001 of 2024, pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura. 3. Learned counsel of the applicants submits that the instant case was lodged due to the matrimonial dispute between the applicant no. 1 and the Opposite Party No. 2 in which all the applicants have been implicated. However, during the pendency of the case before the trial court. 4. Vide order dated 29.8.2025, this Court has directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the compromise. As per the report received from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura dated 29.9.2025, parties appeared before the trial court on 29.9.2025 and in presence of the parties, compromise was duly verified by the trial court. Copy of the order dated 29.9.2025, verifying the compromise is also annexed alongwith the copy of the compromise. 5. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 admits the aforesaid facts regarding execution of compromise and its verification as well. He also supports the prayer for quashing of the entire proceedings against the applicants in the instant case in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties. 6. Ms. Kirti Singh learned AGA, looking at the facts and circumstances of the case and its settlement and verification of the compromise, does not oppose the prayer for Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bharat Jain, Peeyush Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ajay Kumar Pandey, G.A. Himanshu @ Himanshu Chaudhary And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
quashing of the criminal proceedings of the instant case against the applicants herein. 7.
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 applicant no. 1 is the husband of the opposite party no.2. There was a matrimonial dispute between the parties. The other co-accused persons named in the first information report have already been exonerated in the charge-sheet, which was filed only against the applicant no. 1, father-in-law and mother-in-law of Opposite Party No. 2. 8. Since it was a matrimonial dispute between the parties, which has been amicably settled and the compromise executed has been verified by the trial court, therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the criminal proceeding pending against the applicants herein. Thus, in the light of the
judgment of the Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Another : (2012) 10 SCC 303; Prabatbhai Aahir Alias Prabatbhai Bhimsinghbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and Another : (2017) 9 SCC 641; Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab : (2014) 6 SCC 466 and B.S.Joshi and Other vs. State of Haryana and Another : (2003) 4 SCC 67, the instant application is allowed and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2359 of 2025 (wrongly printed as 2359/2024 on the
order sheet) (State versus Himanshu and others) under Sections 115(2), 85, 352 B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Highway, District Mathura, arising out of the Charge Sheet dated 20.11.2024 in connection with the Case Crime No. 1001 of 2024, pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura are hereby quashed. October 14, 2025 n.u. NA528 No. 32567 of 2025 2 (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- NASEEM UDDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad