Parmeshwar Ram and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22853 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for parties.

¶2The present application has been filed to quash chargesheet dated

24.09.2023 and summoning/cognizance order dated 07.10.2023 as well as entire criminal proceedings of S.T. No.649 of 2023 (State Vs. Parmeshwar Ram and others), arising out of Case Crime No.397 of 2023, under Sections 504, 506 IPC and Section 3, 5(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, P.S. Jahanaganj, District Azamgarh, pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge, Court No.6, Azamgarh, on the basis of compromise.

¶3At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants submitted that compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified by learned court concerned on dated 11.07.2025 which has been appended with this petition, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

¶4The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise.

¶5A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mary Puncha (Sheeb Jose), Mohd. Kalim Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Parmeshwar Ram And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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 and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.

¶6In 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.

¶7Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, chargesheet dated 24.09.2023 and summoning/cognizance order dated

07.10.2023 as well as entire criminal proceedings of S.T. No.649 of 2023 (State Vs. Parmeshwar Ram and others), arising out of Case Crime No.397 of 2023, under Sections 504, 506 IPC and Section 3, 5(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, P.S. Jahanaganj, District Azamgarh, pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge, Court No.6, Azamgarh, are hereby quashed.

¶8Accordingly, the present application stands allowed.

¶9This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application.

¶10The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today. September 26, 2025 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 22853 of 2025 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad