Allahabad High Court
RAHUL CHHABRA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- NAND PRABHA SHUKLA
Holding
The High Court held that it will not quash the proceedings at this stage and directed verification of the compromise by the trial court before any further order.
Summary
The applicants, Rahul Chhabra and three others, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Case No. 66500 of 2024) pending before the Judicial Magistrate, alleging that the parties had amicably settled the dispute via a compromise dated 06-04-2026. The State opposed, contending that the trial court must first verify the authenticity and terms of the compromise before any dismissal can be ordered. The High Court, without expressing any view on the merits, directed the parties to appear before the trial court with the certified compromise deed for verification within three weeks. The court instructed that, after verification and hearing, the trial court may pass an appropriate order, and the applicants may approach the High Court again for quashing if warranted. Until verification, no coercive action would be taken against the applicants, and the application was disposed.
Issues considered
- Can a High Court quash pending criminal proceedings on the basis of a private compromise under Section 528 CrPC?
- Is verification of a compromise deed within the jurisdiction of the trial court before any order of quash can be entertained?
- Should the criminal proceedings be stayed pending verification of the compromise?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 354, 406, 498A, 504
Subjects
- compromise
- criminal proceeding
- Section 528 CrPC
- quash of proceedings
- verification of compromise
- high court
- trial court jurisdiction
- abuse of process
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18825 of 2026
Rahul Chhabra And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashutosh Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants, 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 entire proceeding of Case no.
66500 of 2024 (State v. Rahul Chhabra and others) arising out of Case
Crime No. 80 of 2024, under Section-498A, 323, 504, 406, 354 I.P.C. and
3/4 of D.P. Act, 1961, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Ghaziabad,
pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.) Judicial Magistrate FTC-1, Ghaziabad
and Charge Sheet dated 11.10.2024 as well as the Cognizance order/
summoning order dated 23.12.2024 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) Judicial
Magistrate FTC-1, Ghaziabad.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the parties have amicably
settled their disputes vide compromise dated 06.04.2026, which has been
placed as "Annexure No.-5" 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 decided in
accordance with law.
NA528 No. 18825 of 2026
2
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 6, 2026
Aditya Tripathi
Digitally signed by :-
ADITYA TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…