Allahabad High Court
MAHESH CHND PANDEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- DEEPAK VERMA
Holding
The court held that where parties have settled and no useful purpose remains in continuing the prosecution, the proceedings may be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. even for cognizable, non‑compoundable offences.
Summary
The applicants filed a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 3578 of 2019) relating to offences under Sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 IPC. Both the applicants and the second opposite party had amicably settled the dispute and the latter expressed no desire to continue the prosecution. The trial court verified the compromise, and the State’s Advocate General concurred that the matter was settled out of court. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that permit compromise even for cognizable and non‑compoundable offences, the High Court held that continuing the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the entire criminal proceeding was quashed and the Section 482 application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between parties can justify quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for offences that are cognizable and non‑compoundable.
- Whether the court should entertain a petition to quash pending criminal cases on the ground of settlement and lack of useful purpose.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 419, 420, 467, 468
Subjects
- compromise
- criminal procedure
- quash
- Section 482
- non‑compoundable offences
- IPC
- settlement
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46951 of 2019
Mahesh Chand Pandey And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shri Prakash Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Chandra Shekhar Pandey, G.A.
Court No. - 73
HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the
informant, and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire
proceeding of Case No.3578 of 2019, pertaining to Case Crime No.23 of
2019 (State Vs. Mahesh Chand Pandey and others), under section 419,
420, 467, 468 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali City, District Mirzapur,
pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur.
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 27.10.2025 sent
the matter to trial court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 11.11.2025 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 to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further
submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through
compromise their 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
A482 No. 46951 of 2019
2
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.
8. Accordingly, the entire proceeding of Case No.3578 of 2019,
pertaining to Case Crime No.23 of 2019 (State Vs. Mahesh Chand Pandey
and others), under section 419, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C., Police Station-
Kotwali City, District Mirzapur, pending in the court of Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Mirzapur, is hereby quashed.
9. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed.
(Deepak Verma,J.)
March 19, 2026
KJ
Digitally signed by :-
KAMARJAHAN ANSARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…