Allahabad High Court
AVANISH DVIVEDI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- NAND PRABHA SHUKLA
Holding
The High Court held that verification of the compromise must be undertaken by the trial court before any order of quash can be considered.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash criminal proceedings arising from charges under IPC sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, on the ground that the parties had amicably settled the dispute by a compromise dated 12‑09‑2019. The State opposed, contending that the trial court alone is empowered to verify the existence and terms of any compromise before it can entertain a quash order. The High Court, without expressing any view on the merits, directed the parties to appear before the trial court with the compromise deed for verification and to obtain a certified copy of the verification report. The Court further ordered that no coercive action be taken against the applicants until the trial court’s verification is completed and that the applicants may approach the High Court again for quashing after such verification. Consequently, the application was disposed of pending verification of the compromise.
Issues considered
- Can a criminal proceeding be quashed on the basis of a private compromise between the parties under Section 528 CrPC?
- Is verification of a compromise deed within the exclusive jurisdiction of the trial court before any quash order can be entertained?
- Does continuation of the criminal proceeding amount to abuse of process when a compromise has been executed?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 504, 506
Subjects
- Section 528 CrPC
- compromise deed
- quash of criminal proceedings
- verification of compromise
- IPC 498A
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- abuse of process
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10698 of 2026
Avanish Dvivedi And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raghavendra Sharan Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.
1. Vakalatnama filed on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 is taken on
record.
2. Heard Mr. Raghavendra Sharan Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants,
Mr. Kamlesh Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a
prayer to allow this application and quash the entire criminal proceeding as
well as charge sheet dated 14.12.2016 (State Vs. Avnish and others) u/s
498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act arising out of Case Crime
No.1363 of 2015 in Case No. 1218 of 2017 at Police Station Kotwali
Padrauna, District Kushinagar, pending in the court of Civil Judge
(J.D)/FTC-I Kushinagar at Padrauna in the term of compromise dated
12.09.2019 in mediation and Cancellation Kushinagar at Padrauna.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the parties have amicably
settled their disputes vide compromise dated 12.09.2019, which has been
placed as "Annexure No.-5" to the application. Therefore, no useful purpose
would be served in continuing the proceedings before the Court concerned
and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of
process of law.
5. Learned A.G.A., however, submits that it is the Trial Court, which has to
verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence
NA528 No. 10698 of 2026
2
the applicants may approach the concerned Court and move an application
with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in
accordance with law.
6. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, the applicants and opposite party No. 2 are directed to appear before
the Trial Court along with compromise deed as well certified copy of this
order within three weeks from today. It is expected that Court concerned
may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the
presence of the parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in
accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, after giving opportunity
of hearing to both the parties, preferably within a period of three months
from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no
other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying the compromise,
the Court concerned shall also record the statements of the parties as to
whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise
deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not.
7. The Court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of
the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to
approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
8. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court
concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the
aforesaid case.
9. With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of.
(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
March 25, 2026
Aditya Tripathi
Digitally signed by :-
ADITYA TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…