Allahabad High Court

ANWARversusState of U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: SANJIV KUMAR

Holding

The High Court exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC and quashed the charge‑sheet, cognizance order and the entire criminal proceeding.

Summary

The applicant filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge‑sheet dated 1 July 2018 and the cognizance order dated 8 January 2019 in Criminal Case No. 103 of 2019 (State vs. Anwar), which involved offences under Sections 354 and 452 of the IPC. The parties had entered into a compromise, which was verified by the trial court on 20 November 2024 and reported to the High Court. The State’s counsel conceded that the compromise was effected and verified. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decisions in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, the High Court held that its inherent powers can be exercised to end criminal proceedings where a settlement has been reached, even for offences of a private nature. Consequently, the application was allowed and the charge‑sheet, cognizance order and the entire criminal proceeding were quashed.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings on the basis of a compromise between the parties in offences under Sections 354 and 452 IPC.
Whether a compromise, even in non‑compoundable offences, can justify the dismissal of the case.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Indian Penal Code — s. 354, 452

Subjects

Section 482 CrPC
inherent powers
compromise
quash
non‑compoundable offence
IPC Sections 354, 452
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33127 of 2024

Anwar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hasan Parvej
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Aman Kumar, G.A.

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

1. Heard Shri Hasan Parvej, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri
Akhilesh Kr. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the
record.

2. This application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for
quashing the charge-sheet dated 1.7.2018 and cognizance order dated
8.1.2019 as well as the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 103 of
2019 (State vs. Anwar), arising out of Case Crime No. 553 of 2018, under
Sections 354, 452 I.P.C., Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the parties have
entered into compromise and vide order dated 6.11.2024, 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
20.11.2024.

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 6.11.2024 of this Court, A.C.J.M., Court
No.1, Bareilly has submitted his report dated 20.11.2024, which shows that
the compromise entered between the parties has been verified. A copy of the
verification order along with the verified compromise has also been annexed
A482 No. 33127 of 2024
2

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
the charge-sheet dated 1.7.2018 and cognizance order dated 8.1.2019 as
well as the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 103 of 2019 (State vs.
Anwar), arising out of Case Crime No. 553 of 2018, under Sections 354,
452 I.P.C., Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly, 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…