Allahabad High Court

ROOP KISHOR AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 27 September 2026
Bench: DEEPAK VERMA

Holding

The High Court held that, given the verified compromise and lack of any useful purpose in continuing the prosecution, the criminal proceedings must be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Summary

The applicants filed a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Complaint No. 1062 of 2021) that alleged offences under IPC sections 498A, 354, 323, 504, 506 and D.P. Act sections 3 and 4. Both the applicants and the second opposite party had amicably settled the dispute out of court and the trial court had verified the compromise. The State and the second opposite party raised no objection to the quashal. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow compromise even in certain cognizable, non‑compoundable offences, the High Court held that continuing the prosecution would serve no useful purpose and therefore quashed the entire criminal proceeding. The application under Section 482 (and Section 528 BNSS) was allowed.

Issues considered

What is the scope of a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application to quash criminal proceedings when the parties have reached a compromise in cases involving cognizable, non‑compoundable offences?

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482, 528
D.P. Act — s. 3, 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 354, 498A, 504, 506

Subjects

Section 482 Cr.P.C.
compromise
non‑compoundable offences
quash of criminal proceedings
IPC
D.P. Act
settlement out of court

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41471 of 2022

Roop Kishor And 5 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mool Chandra Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vipin Kumar

Court No. - 74
HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Mayank
Maurya, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Vipin Kumar, learned
counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the
State.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash
the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1062 of
2021 (Smt. Radha vs. Roop Kishor and others), under Section
498A, 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.
Kotwali Nagar, District Etah, as well as summoning order
dated 29.08.2022, pending in the court of Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Etah.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants
and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out
of the Court. Applicant approached this Hon'ble Court by filing
this 482 application with prayer to quash the proceedings on
terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble
Court vide order dated 11th May, 2026 sent the matter to trial
court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 26th May, 2026
verified the parties as well as compromise application. He
further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2
compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want
A482 No. 41471 of 2022
2

to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further
submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled
through compromise their private and civil dispute and as such
opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case
against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw
the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the
compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the
prosecution is allowed to go on.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does
not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned
counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents
relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no
objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

5. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled
their dispute out of the Court, hence, no reason to proceed
further.

6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and
others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai
Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC,
641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and
State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688,
wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that
compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of
certain cognizable and non-compoundable offences. Reference
may also be made to the decision given by this Court in
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013
(83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted
herein above, and also the submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion
that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the
proceedings of the above mentioned case.
A482 No. 41471 of 2022
3

8. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint
Case No. 1062 of 2021 (Smt. Radha vs. Roop Kishor and
others), under Section 498A, 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC and
Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Etah, as well
as summoning order dated 29.08.2022, pending in the court of
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah is hereby quashed.

9. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./ 528 BNSS is
accordingly allowed.

September 28, 2026
v.k. updh.

(Deepak Verma,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…