Allahabad High Court

NARENDRA SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: SAMIT GOPAL

Holding

The High Court held that where the parties have reached a lawful compromise, the criminal proceedings may be quashed.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash a criminal complaint (Case No. 31/2019) that alleged offences under IPC sections 323, 325, 504, 506, 354 and Section 3(1)(dha) of the SC/ST Act. A compromise deed dated 27‑03‑2025 had been executed between the parties and was verified by the Additional District and Sessions Judge on 09‑07‑2025 as directed by a coordinate bench of the High Court. The State raised no objection to the compromise. Relying on a line of Supreme Court decisions that allow criminal proceedings to be dismissed where the parties have settled their dispute, the High Court held that the complaint and the summoning order could be quashed. The application was allowed and the criminal case and the summoning order dated 05‑10‑2021 were set aside.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal case pending under the IPC and the SC/ST Act can be quashed on the basis of a settlement/compromise between the parties.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 325, 354, 504, 506
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(dha)

Subjects

settlement
compromise deed
quash of criminal proceedings
Section 528 CrPC
IPC offences
SC/ST Act
Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21416 of 2025

Narendra Singh And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sandeep Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Brijesh Kumar Pandey, G.A.

Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the
applicants, Sri Brijesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite
party no. 2, Sri Devendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the State and
perused the records.

3. The present application under Sections 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicants Narendra Singh and Surendra Sharma, with the prayer to
allow the present application and quash Complaint Case No. 31/2019,
under Section 323, 325, 504, 506, 354 IPC and Section 3(1)(dha) SC/ST
Act, P.S. Hashanpur, District J.P. Nagar (Amroha) (Smt. Suman Devi Vs.
Narendra Singh and another), pending in the court of Additional District
and Session Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), J.P. Nagar (Amroha) as
well as summoning order dated 05.10.2021 in terms of compromise dated
27.03.2025 between the parties and with a further prayer to stay the
further proceedings of the said case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants states that an order was passed by a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.06.2025 directing the
applicants to file the said compromise deed before the court concerned
which was to be verified by the court concerned. In pursuance of the said
order, the court concerned vide order dated 09.07.2025 verified the said
compromise, copy of the same is on record. The same is not disputed by
learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

5. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the said proposition.

6. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement
arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of
(1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4
SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation :
NA528 No. 21416 of 2025
2

(2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16
SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5)
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC
278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur
and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has
held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can
be quashed.

7. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court
on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising
powers by this Court to quash the proceedings, charge sheet as well as
cognizance/summoning order as prayed for by the applicant(s).

8. The present application is allowed.

9. The said complaint case as well as summoning order dated
05.10.2021 of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.

(Samit Gopal,J.)
May 6, 2026
M. ARIF

Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…