Allahabad High Court
CHHOTU AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- NAND PRABHA SHUKLA
Holding
The High Court held that it could not quash the charge sheet and instead directed that the trial court verify the compromise before any further order on the proceedings.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the charge sheet dated 10‑10‑2023 and the cognizance order dated 07‑03‑2024 in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 498A, 323, 406 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They claimed that the parties had amicably settled the dispute through a compromise dated 17‑03‑2026 and argued that continuation of the proceedings would be a waste of judicial time and an abuse of process. The State opposed, contending that the trial court alone must verify the authenticity and legality of the compromise before any dismissal can be ordered. 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 for the trial court to record statements on compliance with the compromise terms. The Court further ordered that no coercive action be taken against the applicants pending verification and that the matter could be revisited for quashing after the trial court’s order. Consequently, the application was disposed of without being allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether a High Court can quash a criminal charge sheet and cognizance order on the basis of a compromise between the parties.
- Whether the trial court must verify the compromise before any dismissal of the criminal proceedings can be ordered.
- Whether the continuation of the criminal proceedings constitutes an abuse of process when a compromise has been executed.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 406, 498A
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of charge sheet
- Section 528
- criminal procedure
- verification of compromise
- abuse of process
- court direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18675 of 2026
Chhotu And 6 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surendra Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Jigyasa Tripathi, holding brief of Mr. Surendra Kumar
Tripathi, 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
quash the impugned charge sheet dated 10.10.2023 & its cognizance order
dated 07.03.2024 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.)/ Fast Track Court No. 01,
Agra as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 4003 of 2024 (State Vs.
Chhotu & others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0093 of 2023, under
Sections 498A, 323, 406 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.-Mahila Thana, District-
Agra, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Agra, on the basis of
compromise entered between the parties dated 17.03.2026.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably
settled their disputes vide compromise dated 17.03.2026, which has been
placed as Annexure No. '4' to the present 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
accordance with law.
NA528 No. 18675 of 2026
2
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.
May 6, 2026
Shivani Sri.
(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHIVANI SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…