2025 Kishan Rawat @ Krishan And 4 Others State of U.P & Anr. v. Kishan Rawat) & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Bench
- VIKRAM D CHAUHAN
Outcome
Quashed
proceedings in question are quashed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 99. 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.…
Judgment
Short counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for opposite party no.2, is taken on record. 1-A. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Mandeep Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application has been filed by applicants for setting aside the entire proceeding of Case No.5582 of 2022 (State Vs. Kishan Rawat & others), which arisen from cognizance order dated 10.10.2022 passed by learned Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Ghaziabad over the charge-sheet dated 12.11.2021 submitted by Investigating Officer in Case Crime No.690 of 2021, under Sections 498- A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Tronika City, District Ghaziabad on the basis of compromise/settlement between the parties on 23.12.2024 in the mediation proceeding.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that divorce by mutual consent has been granted by order dated 24.7.2025 by the Family Court, North-East, Karkardooma Court-02, Delhi, copy of which has been filed at page 66 of the paper book and in view of divorce decree, the present case be finally decided.
Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has not disputed the facts as stated by learned counsel for the applicants. He further contended that 2 NA528 No. 33769 of 2025 opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case against the applicants and the same may be quashed.
Learned AGA does not dispute the fact and 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.
Operative part
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.
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.
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 and in view of divorce decree order dated 2.7.2025 passed by the Family Court, North-East, Karkardooma Court-02, Delhi, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.
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 case is hereby quashed. 3 NA528 No. 33769 of 2025
The present application under Section 528 BNSS is, accordingly, allowed. September 4, 2025 D. Tamang (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: proceedings in question are quashed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.