Allahabad High Court
MOHD JAMEERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- NAND PRABHA SHUKLA
Holding
The High Court declined to quash the charge sheet and instead directed verification of the compromise by the trial court, disposing of the application.
Summary
The applicant, Mohd Jameer, filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order in a criminal case pending before the Judicial Magistrate‑10, Kanpur. He asserted that the dispute with the State had been settled by a compromise dated 08‑07‑2024 and that continuation of the proceedings would be an abuse of process. The State opposed, contending that only the trial court can verify the existence and terms of a compromise and that the applicant should approach that court. The High Court, without expressing any view on the merits, directed both parties to appear before the trial court with the certified compromise deed for verification within three weeks and to record statements on compliance with its terms. It ordered that no coercive action be taken against the applicant pending verification and disposed of the application, leaving open the possibility of a later application for quashing the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether an application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. for quashing a charge sheet can be entertained when the parties claim to have reached a compromise.
- Whether the High Court can itself verify a compromise or must refer the matter to the trial court.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 351(2), 85
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- D.P. Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498-A, 506
- Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 — s. 66E
- Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, 2019
Subjects
- compromise
- quash charge sheet
- Section 528
- criminal procedure
- verification of compromise
- abuse of process
- High Court application
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16499 of 2026
Mohd Jameer
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Akaram
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Mohd. Akram, learned counsel for the applicants, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed to
allow this application and to quash/stay the impugned charge sheet dated
25-02-2025 as well as cognizance order dated 11-11-2025 in Criminal
Case No.156070 of 2025 (State Vs Mohd. Jameer) in Case Crime
No.43/2025 under Sections 85, 115(2), 351(2) B.N.S. (Corresponding
sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C.) and section 3/4 D.P. Act and section
Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, 2019 and section
66E of Information Technology Amendment Act 2008, Police Station
Babupurwa, District - Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial
Magistrate-10, Kanpur Nagar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants and
opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their disputes through
compromise dated 08.07.2024 which has been placed as Annexure No.
"2" 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
NA528 No. 16499 of 2026
2
decided in accordance with law.
5. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, both the parties are directed to appear in person 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 23, 2026
Puspendra
Digitally signed by :-
PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…