Supreme Court Quashes Attempt To Murder Case Recording Settlement Between Landlord & Tenant
The Apex Court was considering an appeal filed against the order of the Allahabad High Court dismissing an Application filed under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of the charge sheet and the summoning order in a criminal case.

Justice B.V. Nagarathna, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has quashed the offences alleged under sections 307 and 324 of the IPC after noting that the parties (landlord and tenant) had already settled the matter.
The Apex Court was considering an appeal filed against the order of the Allahabad High Court dismissing an Application filed under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of the charge sheet and the summoning order in a case registered under Sections 323, 504, 324, 427, 447 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
The Division Bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma said, “We find that the chargesheet may have also been filed under Sections 307 and 324 of the IPC, which are non-compoundable offences. But having regard to the fact that these offences arise from the same incident and certain of these offences are now being compounded having regard to the prayers made by the respective parties, we find that in exercise of our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the offences alleged against the appellant herein under Sections 307 and 324 IPC shall also be quashed as the other offences alleged against the appellant herein are compoundable under Section 320 of the CrPC.”
Advocate Ameet Singh represented the Appellant while AOR Vishnu Shankar Jain represented the Respondent.
Arguments
It was the case of the appellants that the parties had arrived at a settlement since the parties did not wish to proceed against each other in the cases that they had filed against each other. It was further settled between them that the second respondent would continue to remain as a tenant of the appellant on payment of rents regularly. In the circumstances, the parties had decided to seek the quashing of the case filed by the second respondent against the appellant herein. It was submitted that in support of the said application, which had been filed by the respondent under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, affidavits of the parties had also been filed. It was also brought to the Court’s notice that the parties had resolved to put an end to all litigation and disputes between them and to continue their relationship peacefully as landlord and tenant.
Reasoning
The Bench perused the application filed under Article 142 of the Constitution as well as the list of cases and counter-cases already settled between the parties. The Bench found that only one case was pending before the concerned Sessions Court. “We also find that Sections 323, 504, 427, 447 and 506 of the IPC are compoundable offences as per Section 320 of the CrPC”, it said.
The Apex Court held that in exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the offences alleged against the appellant under Sections 307 and 324 IPC shall also be quashed as the other offences alleged against the appellant were compoundable under Section 320 of the CrPC.
Thus, the Bench accepted the prayers and allowed the application filed under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. “Consequently, the proceedings in Case Crime No.415/2019 under Sections 307, 323, 504, 324, 427, 447 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), Police Station - Shahganj, District - Jaunpur pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Court No.17, Jaunpur stand quashed”, the Bench ordered while allowing the appeal.
Cause Title: Nadeem Ahmad v. The State of U.P. & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 659)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates Ameet Singh, Pareena Swarup, Ravi Kumar, Anil Kumar Gupta, Devesh Maurya, AOR Praveen Swarup
Respondent: AOR Vishnu Shankar Jain, Advocates Vikash Bansal, Shaurya Krishna, Marbiang Khongwir, Abdul Qadir Abbasi