Allahabad High Court
SHIV PRATAP SHUKLA AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The High Court held that, in view of the verified compromise and Supreme Court authority allowing settlement of certain non‑compoundable offences, the criminal proceedings must be quashed.
Summary
The applicants (Shiv Pratap Shukla and four others) filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. Act seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 66 of 2021, which involved charges under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 406 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The parties had reached an out‑of‑court settlement dated 9 December 2025, and the trial court verified the compromise. Both the State’s A.G. and the opposing party supported the withdrawal of the prosecution, arguing that continuing the case would serve no useful purpose. The High Court relied on Supreme Court precedents that permit compromise even in certain cognizable and non‑compoundable offences. Consequently, the Court quashed the entire criminal proceeding and allowed the application under Section 528. The order was pronounced on 15 September 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between parties can be permitted to quash criminal proceedings involving cognizable and non‑compoundable offences such as those under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. Act authorises the High Court to quash such proceedings on the basis of a verified settlement.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. Act — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 406, 498A, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- non‑compoundable offences
- Section 528
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- settlement
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 2488 of 2026
Shiv Pratap Shukla And 4 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Kumar Srivastava, Ved Prakash
Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vijai Kumar Tiwari
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ved Prakash Mishra, 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 for
quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 66 of 2021 (State
Vs. Shiv Pratap Shukla and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506,
406 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District
Prayagraj, arising out of Case Crime No. 412 of 2019, pending in the
court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Court No.21, Prayagraj on the
basis of compromise dated 09.12.2025 as well as application on
02.01.2026.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and
opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court.
Applicants approached this Court by filing this application under Section
528 BNSS with prayer to quash the proceedings in terms of compromise
entered between the parties and this Court vide order dated 02.02.2026
directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the
parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated
13.02.2026 verified the parties as well as compromise application. He
further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled their
dispute through compromise and, as such, opposite party no.2 does not
wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party
no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of
NA528 No. 2488 of 2026
2
the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is
allowed to go on.
4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A.
submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court,
hence, no reason to proceed further.
5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs.
State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs.
State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab
(2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5
SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that
compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain
cognizable and non-compoundable offences. Reference may also be made
to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of
U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein
above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties,
this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be
served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.
7. Accordingly, entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 66 of 2021
(State Vs. Shiv Pratap Shukla and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504,
506, 406 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District
Prayagraj, arising out of Case Crime No. 412 of 2019, pending in the
court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Court No.21, Prayagraj, are
hereby quashed in terms of compromise dated 09.12.2025 as well as
application on 02.01.2026.
8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 15, 2026
v.k. updh.
Digitally signed by :-
VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…