Allahabad High Court
SHASHANK SHARMA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- NAND PRABHA SHUKLA
Holding
The High Court held that it would not quash the criminal proceeding but directed the parties to approach the trial court for verification of the compromise and disposed of the application.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 7037 of 2019, which involved offences under Sections 498‑A, 452, 323, 504, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They claimed that a compromise had been reached on 30‑03‑2026, evidenced by a Memorandum of Understanding, and argued that continuation of the trial would be an abuse of process. The opposite party did not contest the existence of the compromise, but the State’s A.G.A. contended that only the trial court can verify the validity of such a compromise. The High Court, without expressing any view on the merits, directed the parties to appear before the trial court with the compromise deed for verification and ordered that no coercive action be taken pending that verification. The application was consequently disposed, leaving the matter to be decided by the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding can be quashed on the basis of a compromise under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.
- Whether the High Court can entertain a quash application without the trial court first verifying the compromise
- Whether the trial court has jurisdiction to verify and approve a compromise in offences under the IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 452, 498-A, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceeding
- Section 528
- IPC offences
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- verification of compromise
- high court direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18716 of 2026
Shashank Sharma And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Krishna Pratap Singh, Parth Sarthi
Tripathi, Suman, Vishal Pandey
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Yogendra Gupta, holding brief of Mr. Chandan Singh, learned
counsel for the applicants, Mr. Krishna Pratap Singh, 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 B.N.S.S. has been filed with a
prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 7037 of 2019
(State Vs. Shashank Sharma and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 551
of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry
Prohibition Act, Police Station-Majhola, District-Moradabad, pending in the
court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.4,
Moradabad, in the light of compromise dated 30.03.2026 arrived between
the parties.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably
settled their disputes vide Memorandum of Understanding dated 30.03.2026,
which has been placed as Annexure No. '6' 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 counsel for the opposite party No. 2 does not dispute the
submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants or
correctness of the documents relied upon by him.
5. 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
NA528 No. 18716 of 2026
2
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.
6. 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 Memorandum of Understanding 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.
7. 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.
8. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court
concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the
aforesaid case.
9. 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…