NA528/40857/2025 of VIJESH VOHRA AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40857 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and Sri Shams Uz Zaman, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA. 2. The present application has been filed to quash chargesheet dated 22.05.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 20.06.2024 along with entire criminal proceedings of Case No.3669 of 2024 (State Vs. Vijesh Vohra and another), arising out of Case Crime No.106 of 2024, under Sections 452, 354(B), 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Baraut, District Baghpat, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat, on the basis of compromise. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants has submitted that compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified by learned court concerned on dated 22.12.2025 which has been appended with the supplementary affidavit, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for opposite party no.2. 4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and as such, there would be no harm and error if the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise. 5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 , has observed in para 54 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Umesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Shams Uz Zaman, G.A. Vijesh Vohra And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. 6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties. 7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, chargesheet dated 22.05.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 20.06.2024 along with entire criminal proceedings of Case No.3669 of 2024 (State Vs. Vijesh Vohra and another), arising out of Case Crime No.106 of 2024, under Sections 452, 354(B), 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Baraut, District Baghpat, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat, are hereby quashed. 8. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed. 9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that she has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, she may seek recall of this order by way of filing recall application explaining the reasons. February 3, 2026 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 40857 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.)