Allahabad High Court

KHALIL KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: SANJIV KUMAR

Holding

The Court held that its inherent jurisdiction may be exercised to quash the charge‑sheet and cognizance order where a verified compromise exists, even for a non‑compoundable offence, as the dispute is purely private and lacks broader social impact.

Summary

The applicant filed an application under the inherent powers of the High Court to quash a charge‑sheet dated 27‑08‑2012 in a criminal case under Section 420 IPC and the cognizance order dated 01‑12‑2012. Both parties had entered into a compromise, which was verified by the trial court on 7‑June‑2024 following the High Court’s direction. The State’s counsel conceded that the compromise was genuine and had been duly verified. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court held that its inherent jurisdiction can be exercised to end criminal proceedings where a settlement has been reached, even in offences that are ordinarily non‑compoundable, provided there is no larger public interest. Consequently, the application was allowed and the charge‑sheet and cognizance order were quashed.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings where the parties have reached a verified compromise.
Whether a compromise is permissible in a case involving a non‑compoundable offence under Section 420 IPC.
Whether quashing the charge‑sheet and cognizance order serves the ends of justice in the present circumstances.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Indian Penal Code — s. 420

Subjects

compromise
inherent jurisdiction
quash
Section 420 IPC
Section 482 CrPC
private dispute
High Court

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16527 of 2024

Khalil Khan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bhaskar Bhadra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajveer Chaurasiya

Court No. - 83
HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J.

1. Heard Shri Anuj Kr. Yadav, advocate holding brief of Sri Bhaskar
Bhadra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of
U.P., Shri Rajveer Chaurasiya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.
2 and perused the record.

2. This application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for
quashing the charge-sheet dated 27.8.2012 filed in Case Crime No.
6315A of 2021, under Section 420 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District
Bareilly as well as cognizance order dated 01.12.2012, passed in Criminal
Case No. 7072 of 2012 (State vs. Khalil Khan).

3. Learned counsel for the applicant as well as opposite party No.2 jointly
submitted that the parties have entered into compromise and vide order
dated 20.5.2024, a direction was given to the learned Trial Court to verify
the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the
aforesaid order, learned Trial Court has verified the contents of
compromise vide order dated 7.6.2024.

4. 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.

5. In pursuance of the order dated 20.5.2024 of this Court, C.J.M., Bareilly
has submitted his report dated 7.6.2024, which shows that the compromise
entered between the parties has been verified. A copy of the verification
A482 No. 16527 of 2024
2

order along with the verified compromise has also been annexed with the
report.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and
charge-sheet dated 27.8.2012 filed in Case Crime No. 6315A of 2021,
under Section 420 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Bareilly as well
as cognizance order dated 01.12.2012, passed in Criminal Case No. 7072
of 2012 are hereby quashed.

(Sanjiv Kumar,J.)
May 6, 2026
Vandana

Digitally signed by :-
VANDANA GAUTAM
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…