Allahabad High Court
ANUJ KUMAR SHUKAL ALIAS ANUJ KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- PADAM NARAIN MISHRA
Holding
The High Court quashed the charge‑sheet, cognizance order and all proceedings in the case.
Summary
Anuj Kumar Shukla filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash the charge‑sheet dated 09‑10‑2021, the cognizance order dated 07‑12‑2021, and the entire proceedings of case No. 2679 of 2021 relating to offences under Sections 504, 506 and 324 IPC. The parties had reached a compromise on 13‑12‑2024, which was verified before the court. The State’s second opposite party expressed no desire to continue the prosecution. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, the High Court held that continuation of criminal proceedings would be futile despite the offences being non‑compoundable. Consequently, the application was allowed and the entire criminal proceedings were quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings for non‑compoundable offences under Sections 504, 506 and 324 IPC can be quashed under Section 528 CrPC on the basis of a settlement between the parties.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 324, 504, 506
Subjects
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 528
- quash of proceedings
- settlement
- non‑compoundable offences
- IPC Sections 504, 506, 324
- High Court judgment
- compromise
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 2793 of 2025
Anuj Kumar Shukal Alias Anuj Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Singh, Chandra Bhushan Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 82
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.
1. The present 528 BNSS application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated
09.10.2021, cognizance order dated 07.12.2021 as well as entire proceedings of Case
No. 2679 of 2021 (State Vs. Anuj Kumar Shukla) arising out of Case Crime No. 408
of 2021, under Sections 504, 506, 324 I.P.C., Police Station- Deviyarpur, District-
Auraiya.
2. Learned counsel for both the parties submitted that the parties have settled their
dispute by way of compromise dated 13.12.2024, which has been verified in
pursuance of order dated 27.01.2025 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court
and the photo copies of certified copies of the verified compromise as well as
verification proceedings have been sent by the trial court concerned, which is on
record.
3. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 argued that as the parties have already
arrived at amicable settlement on 13.12.2024 in the aforesaid case and, therefore,
opposite party no. 2 is no more interested to pursue the case any more against the
applicants.
4. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for the Opposite Party
No.2 and learned AGA for the State.
5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab &
another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed that: (SCC p.340, para 58)
"58. 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. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, the
present application under Section 528 BNSS stands allowed.
NA528 No. 2793 of 2025
2
7. The entire proceedings of charge-sheet dated 09.10.2021, cognizance order dated
07.12.2021 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 2679 of 2021 (State Vs. Anuj
Kumar Shukla) arising out of Case Crime No. 408 of 2021, under Sections 504, 506,
324 I.P.C., Police Station- Deviyarpur, District-Auraiya, is hereby quashed.
8. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties. If at all,
opposite party no. 2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he
may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application.
9. The parties may file the certified copy of this order before the court concerned
within six weeks from today.
March 19, 2026
Israr
(Padam Narain Mishra,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ISRAR AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…