Allahabad High Court

SHIV NARAYANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: SAURABH SRIVASTAVA

Holding

The High Court held that the criminal proceedings were to be quashed as the dispute was settled and continuation would be futile, in line with Supreme Court precedents.

Summary

Shiv Narayan filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge‑sheet dated 04‑09‑2022 and the criminal proceedings (Case No.1486 of 2023) relating to IPC offences 420, 467, 468 and 471. The applicant claimed that a compromise between the parties had been reached and was verified by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) on 10‑07‑2026. Both parties admitted the settlement and argued that continuation of the case would serve no purpose and would be contrary to the interests of justice. The High Court relied on the Supreme Court’s observations in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) and Madhavrao Scindia v. Angre (1988), which permit quashing of criminal proceedings where a genuine settlement exists even for non‑compoundable offences. Accordingly, the Court quashed the charge‑sheet and the proceedings and allowed the application.

Issues considered

Whether criminal proceedings for non‑compoundable offences under the IPC can be quashed on the basis of a compromise/settlement between the parties under Section 528 CrPC.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 420, 467, 468, 471

Subjects

compromise
quash of criminal proceedings
non‑compoundable offences
Section 528 CrPC
settlement
justice
IPC offences

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 20915 of 2026

Shiv Narayan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : G.A., Jay Prakash Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

Court No. - 79
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated
04.09.2022 and the entire proceedings of Case No.1486 of 2023 (State vs.
Shiv Narayan) arising out of Case Crime No.178 of 2021, under sections
420, 467, 468, 471 IPC P.S. Tonika City, District Ghaziabad, pending in
the court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No.4,
Ghaziabad on the basis of compromise dated 14.11.2025 made between
the parties.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant submitted that
compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been
verified by learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No.4,
Ghaziabad on dated 10.07.2026 which has been appended with
supplementary affidavit preferred on behalf of applicant, this fact has also
been ascertained and seconded by both the parties/learned counsel for
applicant.

4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise
has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties
and jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and would be
in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of
the compromise.

5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of
NA528 No. 20915 of 2026
2

Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the
said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding
having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the
victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it
does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an
exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute
between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the
ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.

6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao
Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has
also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial,
family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special
feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine
settlement of disputes between the parties.

7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the
case, charge-sheet dated 04.09.2022 and the entire proceedings of Case
No.1486 of 2023 (State vs. Shiv Narayan) arising out of Case Crime
No.178 of 2021, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC P.S. Tonika City,
District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior
Division) Court No.4, Ghaziabad, are hereby quashed.

8. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed.

9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting
parties. If at all, informant/opposite party no.2 feels that he/she has been
duped or betrayed, then in that event, he/she may file recall application
explaining the reasons for filing the said application.

September 29, 2026
Ashish/-

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
ASHISH KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…