Allahabad High Court
ASHOK KUMAR AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SANJIV KUMAR
Holding
The High Court held that, on verification of a genuine compromise, it may quash the criminal proceedings under its inherent powers.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under the inherent powers of the High Court to quash the charge‑sheet and proceedings in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The civil court had verified a compromise between the parties on 17‑02‑2026, and the State’s A.G. conceded that the settlement was genuine. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow the court to use its inherent jurisdiction to achieve real and substantial justice, the High Court held that the dispute was private, had no wider social impact, and the parties did not wish to pursue the case further. Consequently, the court allowed the application and quashed the charge‑sheet, cognizance order and the entire criminal proceedings. The decision underscores the court’s power to terminate criminal actions when a lawful compromise is verified.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings after a verified compromise between the parties.
- Whether a compromise is permissible in cases involving offences under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- inherent jurisdiction
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 482 CrPC
- IPC 498A
- domestic violence
- Dowry Prohibition Act
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12037 of 2020
Ashok Kumar And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Avanish Kumar Shukla, Bhishm Pal
Singh, Mithilesh Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajendra Singh Yadav
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J.
1. Heard Mr. Bhishm Pal Singh learned counsel for the applicants, Sri
O.P. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., and Sri Rajendra Singh
Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and perused the record.
2. This application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for
quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 02.07.2019, cognizance order
dated 15.02.2020 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2716
of 2020 (State Vs. Atul and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 201 of
2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station
Makkhanpur, District Firozabad, pending in the Court of Additional Civil
Judge (J.D.) Ist, Firozabad.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that vide order dated
22.01.2026, a direction was given to the court concerned to verify the
factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the
aforesaid order, the court concerned had verified the contents of
compromise.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that the parties
have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the court
concerned vide order dated 17.02.2026.
5. In this regard, the court concerned i.e. learned Civil Judge (S.D.)/
F.T.C., Firozabad has sent report dated 17.02.2026, along with
A482 No. 12037 of 2020
2
verification order and verified compromise, which shows that both the
parties appeared before the Court and verified the compromise.
6. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected
between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court
below.
7. 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.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts and considering that the parties do not
wish to pursue the case any further, the dispute is essentially of a private
nature and has no wider social impact. Since it has been mutually settled
between the parties by way of a compromise, no useful purpose would be
served by proceeding with the matter further.
9. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and
impugned charge-sheet dated 02.07.2019, cognizance order dated
15.02.2020 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2716 of
2020 (State Vs. Atul and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 201 of
2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station
Makkhanpur, District Firozabad, pending in the Court of Additional Civil
Judge (J.D.) Ist, Firozabad, are hereby quashed.
(Sanjiv Kumar,J.)
April 20, 2026
SFH
Digitally signed by :-
SYED FAHIM HUSAIN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…