Allahabad High Court
LEELAWATI AND 10 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SANJIV KUMAR
Holding
The High Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS and quashed the criminal proceedings on account of a verified compromise between the parties.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash criminal case No. 13113 of 2025 (State v. Kamlesh Ojha et al.) involving offences under IPC sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506 and 308. The parties had entered into a compromise on 29 July 2025, which was verified by the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s court on 24 February 2026 following an order dated 18 September 2025. Both sides jointly submitted that the dispute was private, settled, and that continuation of the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Relying on its inherent jurisdiction and precedents such as Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court held that it could exercise its power under Section 528 BNSS to terminate the proceedings. Accordingly, the application was allowed and the criminal case was quashed.
Issues considered
- Can the High Court exercise its inherent power under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash criminal proceedings after a verified compromise between the parties?
- Does a private settlement bar the continuation of criminal prosecution for offences punishable under the IPC?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Settlement Scheme (BNSS) — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 308, 323, 325, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- criminal proceeding
- quash
- inherent jurisdiction
- Section 528 BNSS
- IPC offences
- private settlement
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30595 of 2025
Leelawati And 10 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : V.K. Baranwal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vivek Kumar Shukla
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J.
1. Heard Mr. V.K. Baranwal, learned counsel for the applicants, learned
A.G.A. for the State of U.P., Mr. Vivek Kumar Shukla, learned counsel
for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.
2. This application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for
quashing the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.13113 of 2025 (State
Vs. Kamlesh Ojha and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 12 of 2022,
under Sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Kasya,
District Kushinagar, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Kushinagar at Padrauna due to both the parties entered into compromise
dated 29.07.2025.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants as well as opposite party No.2
jointly submitted that vide order dated 18.09.2025, a direction was given
to the court concerned to verify the factum of compromise executed by
the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the court concerned had
verified the contents of compromise.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite
party no. 2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into
compromise, which has duly been verified by the court concerned vide
order dated 24.02.2026, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure
No.SCA-1 to the short counter affidavit dated 16.03.2026 on behalf of
opposite party No.2.
NA528 No. 30595 of 2025
2
5. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected
between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court
below.
6. Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power
can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian
Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others
Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of
Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to
speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the
settlement is arrived at between the parties.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and considering that the parties do not
wish to pursue the case any further, the dispute is essentially of a private
nature and has no wider social impact. Since it has been mutually settled
between the parties by way of a compromise, no useful purpose would be
served by proceeding with the matter further.
8. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and
Case No.13113 of 2025 (State Vs. Kamlesh Ojha and others), arising out
of Case Crime No. 12 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506,
308 I.P.C., Police Station Kasya, District Kushinagar, pending in the
Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar at Padrauna, are hereby
quashed.
(Sanjiv Kumar,J.)
April 20, 2026
SFH
Digitally signed by :-
SYED FAHIM HUSAIN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…