Allahabad High Court
ANSHUL MALIK AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
A criminal case may be quashed where the parties have arrived at a genuine compromise, as affirmed by Supreme Court jurisprudence.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the charge‑sheet, cognizance order and subsequent proceedings in a criminal case filed under IPC sections 498A, 323 and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, on the ground that the parties had reached a compromise on 17‑12‑2025. The respondents admitted the compromise and raised no objection to quashing. The Court examined the settled law that a criminal case may be dismissed when the parties have amicably settled their dispute, citing several Supreme Court decisions. Relying on those precedents, the Court held that the compromise was genuine and sufficient to warrant dismissal of the proceedings. Consequently, the entire proceedings against the applicants were quashed and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings under IPC sections 498A, 323 and the Dowry Prohibition Act can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties.
- Whether Section 528 of the BNSS empowers the High Court to quash such proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1980 — s. 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528 BNSS
- IPC 498A
- IPC 323
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Supreme Court precedent
- settlement of criminal case
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14672 of 2026
Anshul Malik And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hemant Tyagi, Sumit Suri
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Mr. Nipun Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Hemant
Tyagi, learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr. Shashank Shekhar Misra,
learned Counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State and
perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicants with the following prayer:
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be
pleased to allow this application and quash the impugned charge sheet dated
19.08.2023 and the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 13.08.2024 passed
by the Ld. Civil Judge (S.D.) (F.T.C.), Gautam Buddha Nagar along with the
impugned order dated 06.01.2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.) FTC II,
Gautam Buddha Nagar in Case No. 8518/2024 (State v. Anshul Malik) arising out of
Case Crime No.181 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323 IPC and Section 4 Dowry
Prohibition Act, PS- Mahila Thana, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar and as well as
the entire proceedings of Case No. 8518/2024 (State v. Anshul Malik) arising out of
Case Crime No.181 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323 IPC and Section 4 Dowry
Prohibition Act, PS-Mahila Thana, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar pending in the
court of the Ld. Civil Judge (S.D.) (F.T.C.), Gautam Buddha Nagar on the basis of
compromise arrived at between the parties on 17.12.2025."
3. Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants and
opposite party no.2 have compromised the dispute. It is further argued that
the said compromise has also been verified by the concerned Trial Court, as
such the proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.
4. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 admitted the fact of compromise
and stated that he has no objection if the proceeding of the aforesaid case is
NA528 No. 14672 of 2026
2
quashed against the applicants.
5. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered into
compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.
6. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement
arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of
(1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4
SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation :
(2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16
SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5)
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278
and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and
others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that
the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.
7. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on
the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by
this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicants.
8. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case with regard to the present
applicants are hereby quashed.
9. The present application is allowed.
September 17, 2026
Vijay
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…