No. 10752 of 2025 · Allahabad High Court

: Sagar Singh, Shri Ram Maurya : G.A. Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

Sri Gaurav Joshi, Advocate, is present on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 by filing his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants mainly with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings arising out of complaint case no. 4127/2023, Heer versus Shueb and others, under section 498A/323/504/506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Provision Act, pending before the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), FTC, crimes against women district Unnao, which is annexed as Annexure no. 1 to this petition and the consequent proceedings thereto, in respect of the applicants.

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that parties do not want to pursue the case any further and they have entered into compromise. He further submits that vide order dated 13.10.2025 a direction was given to the trial court to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, learned trial court had verified the contents of compromise vide its order dated 17.10.2025.

Sri Gaurav Joshi, Advocate, appearing for the opposite party No. 2, agrees to the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, 2 A482 No. 10752 of 2025 and he does not have any objection to the aforesaid proceedings being quashed.

Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the trial court.

Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter is purely of personal nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.