Allahabad High Court
SUMIT SAINI @ SUMIT AND 6 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 BNSS seeking to quash a charge‑sheet and related criminal proceedings on the ground that the parties had amicably settled the dispute by a compromise dated 17‑03‑2026. The State opposed, contending that the trial court must first verify the existence and terms of the compromise before any quash order can be entertained. The High Court, without expressing any view on the merits, directed the parties to appear before the trial court with the compromise deed and a certified copy of the order for verification, after which the trial court may pass an appropriate order, including quashing the proceedings. The Court also ordered that no coercive action be taken against the applicants pending verification. The application was therefore disposed, with a direction to approach the trial court for verification of the compromise.
Issues considered
- Whether a High Court can quash criminal proceedings on the basis of a compromise without the trial court first verifying the compromise.
- Whether the parties must approach the trial court to seek verification of the compromise deed before any further relief can be granted.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 115(2), 351(3), 352, 528, 85
- DP Act, 1961 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528 BNSS
- verification of compromise
- abuse of process
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18541 of 2026
Sumit Saini @ Sumit And 6 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anirudh Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Anirudh Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Raj
Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, learned A.G.A. 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 Charge-sheet dated
16.09.2025, being C.S. No. 375/2025 as well as entire proceedings registered
in its pursuance as Criminal Case No.406 of 2026, (State of U.P. Vs. Sumit
and Others), under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3) BNS & Section 3/4 DP
Act, 1961 against Applicant No.1 to 6 and under Sections 75, 85, 115(2),
352,351(3) BNS & Section 3/4 DP Act, 1961 against Applicant No.7 arising
out of Case Crime No.412 of 2025, registered at Police Station-Nai Mandi,
District-Muzaffarnagar, including order of cognizance as well as summoning
order dated 12.01.2026 passed by Court below in aforesaid proceedings,
presently pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate 1st, Muzaffarnagar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the parties have amicably
settled their disputes vide compromise dated 17.03.2026, which has been
placed as "Annexure No.-6" 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
NA528 No. 18541 of 2026
2
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
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.)
May 5, 2026
Aditya Tripathi
Digitally signed by :-
ADITYA TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…