Allahabad High Court

SHIVAM AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 31 March 2026
Bench: NAND PRABHA SHUKLA

Holding

The High Court held that the matter of verifying the compromise must be decided by the trial court and therefore did not quash the proceedings.

Summary

The applicants, Shivam and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Case No.41 of 2024) arising from offences under Sections 498A, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They claimed that the dispute had been settled by a compromise dated 27‑02‑2026 and that continuing the trial would be an abuse of process. The State opposed, stating that only the trial court can verify the existence and validity of a compromise and that the applicants should approach that court. The High Court, without deciding the merits, directed the parties to appear before the trial court with the compromise deed for verification and ordered that no coercive action be taken pending that verification. The High Court left open the possibility of a later application for quashing after the trial court’s verification. Consequently, the application was disposed of without being allowed.

Issues considered

Whether a High Court can quash pending criminal proceedings on the basis of a compromise between the parties under Section 528 of the BNSS.
Whether the trial court alone has jurisdiction to verify the authenticity and fulfillment of a compromise deed in criminal matters.

Legislation cited

BNSS Act — s. 528
Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 324, 498A, 504, 506

Subjects

compromise
quash of criminal proceedings
Section 528
abuse of process
verification of compromise
criminal trial
High Court

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 13109 of 2026

Shivam And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants,
learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a
prayer to allow this application and quash the entire proceeding of Case
No.41 of 2024 (State v. Shivam and others), charge sheet dated
08.05.2024, arising out of Case Crime No.41 of 2024, under Section
498A, 323, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-
Dankaur, District-Gautam Buddha Nagar as well as impugned
cognizance/summoning order dated 01.10.2024, pending in the court of
learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Gautam Buddha Nagar
on the basis of compromise dated 27.02.2026.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have paid the
entire amount to opposite party No. 2 and parties have settled the dispute
through compromise dated 27.02.2026 which has been placed as
"Annexure No.-3" 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.

4. 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
the applicants may approach the concerned Court and move an application
with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in
NA528 No. 13109 of 2026
2

accordance with law.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court
concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the
aforesaid case.

8. With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of.

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
April 1, 2026
Aditya Tripathi

Digitally signed by :-
ADITYA TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…