Allahabad High Court

PRAKASH GOVIND @ PRAKASH GOVIND SINGH PAL AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 22 February 2026
Bench: NAND PRABHA SHUKLA

Holding

The High Court held that the application for quashing cannot be entertained until the trial court verifies the compromise, and therefore directed the parties to appear before the trial court with the compromise deed.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a criminal proceeding (Complaint Case No. 464 of 2024) on the ground that the parties had reached a compromise. Both parties submitted a compromise deed dated 5 January 2026 and agreed that continuing the trial would be a waste of time and an abuse of process. The State’s Attorney General argued that the trial court must first verify the authenticity and fulfillment of the compromise before any order can be passed. 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 and ordered that no coercive action be taken pending that verification. The Court further indicated that after verification, the trial court may pass an appropriate order, including possibly quashing the proceedings, and disposed of the present application.

Issues considered

Whether an application under Section 528 CrPC for quashing criminal proceedings can be entertained when the parties claim to have reached a compromise.
Whether the trial court must first verify the compromise before the High Court can quash the proceedings.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 115(2), 351(2), 352, 528, 76

Subjects

Section 528 CrPC
compromise deed
quash of criminal proceedings
abuse of process
verification of compromise
trial court jurisdiction

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 2642 of 2026

Prakash Govind @ Prakash Govind Singh Pal And 4
Others .....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. - 76
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, 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 to
quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 464 of 2024, under
Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 76 B.N.S., Police Station-Bachhrayun,
District-J.P. Nagar (Amroha) Smt. Poonam Pal Versus Prakash Govind and
other pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, J.P. Nagar
(Amroha) as well as summoning order dated 09.10.2024 in terms of
compromise.

3. Learned counsels for the parties submit that they have amicably settled
their disputes vide compromise dated 05.01.2026, which has been placed as
Annexure No. '3' 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
the applicants may approach the concerned Court and move an application
with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in
NA528 No. 2642 of 2026
2

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 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.

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.

February 23, 2026
Shivani
(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
SHIVANI SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…