Allahabad High Court

SANJAY SHUKLA AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: PRASHANT MISHRA I

Holding

The High Court held that, given a verified compromise, the criminal proceeding should be quashed as it serves no useful purpose.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 seeking to quash Criminal Complaint No. 5548 of 2019, which alleged offences under IPC sections 498‑A, 323, 504 and Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4. The parties had entered into a compromise on 15 May 2026, which was verified by the Judicial Magistrate’s Court and reported to the High Court. Both the applicants' counsel and the Additional Government Advocate argued that the dispute was settled and there was no public interest in continuing prosecution. The High Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents permitting compromise even in certain cognizable and non‑compoundable offences, held that proceeding would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the Court allowed the Section 528 application and quashed the entire criminal proceeding.

Issues considered

Whether a compromise can be permitted to extinguish prosecution in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences under IPC 498‑A, 323, 504 and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Whether the High Court may quash a criminal proceeding on the basis of a verified compromise under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S., 2023 — s. 528
Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498-A, 504

Subjects

compromise
quash
Section 528
non‑compoundable offence
IPC 498-A
Dowry Prohibition Act
high court
criminal proceeding

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 29314 of 2026

Sanjay Shukla And 5 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 84
HON'BLE PRASHANT MISHRA-I, J.

1. Supplementary-affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants, is
taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Arun Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the
applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the
State.

3. The instant application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 has been
filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.
5548 of 2019 (Smt. Swati Awasthi Versus Sanjay Shukla and others) u/s
498-A, 323, 504 of I.P.C and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police
Station Rail Bazar, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial
Magistrate 7th Kanpur Nagar, on the basis of compromise dated 15.05.2026.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant drew attention of this Court on the order
passed by this Court on 29.07.2026 by which learned trial court was directed
to verify the status and identities of the parties and compromise so entered
between them and thereafter send its report. In compliance thereof, the
learned trial court has sent its report dated 13.08.2026, according to which,
compromise between the parties had been verified by the learned trial court.
It has further been contended that applicants and Opposite Party No. 2 have
compromised the matter and opposite party No. 2 does not want to proceed
the matter against the applicants. The Opposite Party No. 2 is ready to
withdraw the criminal prosecution of the applicants and in view of the
compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is
allowed to go on.
NA528 No. 29314 of 2026
2

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that both the parties
have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, there is no reason to
proceed further.

6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases 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 had 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.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein
above, and also the submissions made by the learned counsels 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.

8. Accordingly, the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 5548 of 2019
(Smt. Swati Awasthi Versus Sanjay Shukla and others) u/s 498-A, 323, 504
of I.P.C and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Rail Bazar,
District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 7th
Kanpur Nagar, on the basis of compromise dated 15.05.2026, are hereby
quashed.

9. This application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 is accordingly
allowed.

September 29, 2026
A. Mandhani

(Prashant Mishra-I,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK MANDHANI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…