Allahabad High Court
AJAY KUMAR AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The High Court held that the criminal proceedings may be quashed as the dispute has been settled, even though the offences are non‑compoundable.
Summary
The applicants, Ajay Kumar and three others, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge-sheet and proceedings relating to offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 427 IPC. The parties had amicably settled the dispute, and the compromise was verified by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate. Both sides agreed that continuation of the criminal case would serve no purpose and would be contrary to the interests of justice. The High Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow quashing of non‑compoundable offences where a genuine settlement exists, held that the proceedings should be dismissed. Consequently, the application was allowed and the criminal case was quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings for non‑compoundable offences can be quashed under Section 528 CrPC on the basis of a compromise between the offender and the victim.
- Whether the High Court has the jurisdiction to quash such proceedings despite the offences being non‑compoundable.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 427, 504, 506
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- quash of proceedings
- compromise settlement
- non‑compoundable offences
- Section 528 CrPC
- justice
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 29051 of 2026
Ajay Kumar And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anil Mishra, G.A.
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
08.08.2019, cognizance/summoning order dated 05.02.2026 and the entire
proceedings of Case No.38 of 2026 (State vs. Ajay Kumar and others)
arising out of Case Crime No.330 of 2019, under sections 323, 504, 506,
427 IPC, P.S. Mauaima, District Prayagraj, pending in the court of
learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants submitted that
compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been
verified by learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj on dated
13.08.2026, which has been appended with ordersheeet to this
application, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned
counsel for opposite parties.
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
Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the
said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding
NA528 No. 29051 of 2026
2
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 08.08.2019, cognizance/summoning order dated
05.02.2026 and the entire proceedings of Case No.38 of 2026 (State vs.
Ajay Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No.330 of 2019, under
sections 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, P.S. Mauaima, District Prayagraj,
pending in the court of learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Allahabad, 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 21, 2026
Ashish/-
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ASHISH KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…