Allahabad High Court
BALVEER SAHAI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings and allowed the application under Section 528 BNSS, finding that continuation would constitute an abuse of process.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Complaint Case No. 628 of 2019) filed under Sections 406 and 506 IPC. A settlement between the parties was reached on 26 May 2022 and later verified by the Judicial Magistrate on 25 June 2025, with a further compromise dated 4 August 2025. The opposite party’s counsel did not dispute the settlement and expressed a desire not to pursue the case. The Court held that continuing the criminal prosecution would amount to an abuse of process and would be contrary to the interests of justice. Relying on established Supreme Court precedents, the Court quashed the entire criminal proceeding and allowed the application under Section 528 BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings under Sections 406 and 506 IPC can be quashed on the basis of a settlement and compromise between the parties.
- Whether the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 528 BNSS permits the dismissal of such proceedings to prevent abuse of process.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Settlement (BNSS) Act, 2023 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 506
Subjects
- criminal law
- settlement
- compromise
- quash of proceedings
- abuse of process
- inherent jurisdiction
- Section 528 BNSS
- Sections 406 IPC
- Sections 506 IPC
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 13591 of 2025
Balveer Sahai And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dharmendra Pratap Singh Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anil Kumar, G.A.
Court No. - 81
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicants is taken on
record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused
the material available on record.
3. The applicants by means of present application have invoked the
inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the entire
proceedings of Complaint Case No. 628 of 2019 (Deepak vs. Balveer and
others), under Sections 406 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Chandausi, District-
Sambhal, pending in the Court court of Civil Judge (J.D.), Sambhal, as
well as cognizance/summoning order dated 24.7.2023 passed by A.C.J.M,
Chandausi, District-Moradabad.
4. As per record, a settlement was arrived at between the parties on
26.5.2022, the copy of the same is on record. The said
settlement/compromise dated 26.5.2022 was verified by learned Judicial
Magistrate, Sambhal at Chandausi on 25.6.2025, copy whereof has been
filed as Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has
already been entered between the parties on 26.5.2022 and the same has
been verified by the court concerned on 25.6.2025, therefore, the present
case be decided finally. The said compromise verification order has been
filed as Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit.
NA528 No. 13591 of 2025
2
6. Learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 has not disputed the
facts, as stated by learned counsel for the applicants. He further contended
that, opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case
against the applicants and the same may be quashed.
7. It would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with
the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would
tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise
between the parties and to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that
the criminal case is put to an end.
8. In view of the fact that, the parties do not want to pursue the case any
further, as stated by them and the fact that matter has been mutually
settled between the parties in view of the compromise dated 4.8.2025, no
useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.
9. Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir 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 Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, summoning order dated
7.9.2024 passed by learned Special Judge Dacoity Affected
Area/Additional Sessions Judge-III, Farrukhabad and well as the entire
proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
10. The present application under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 is accordingly
allowed.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
May 5, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…