Allahabad High Court
VIJAY PAL AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings as the parties had amicably settled the dispute and there was no legal impediment to doing so.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash criminal proceedings (ST No.1935 of 2024) arising from Crime No.455 of 2020, which involved offences under IPC sections 323, 325, 504 and 506. The parties had reached an amicable settlement, which was verified by the Additional District Judge on 18‑08‑2026 and was acknowledged by both counsel. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow quashing of non‑compoundable offences where a genuine compromise exists, the High Court held that continuation of the trial would be futile and contrary to the ends of justice. Consequently, the court quashed the entire criminal proceeding and allowed the application. The order also permitted the opposite party to file a recall application if they felt aggrieved.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings for non‑compoundable offences can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the accused and the victim.
- Whether the compromise, verified by the trial court, negates the need for continuation of the prosecution.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 325, 504, 506
Subjects
- quash of criminal proceedings
- compromise
- non‑compoundable offences
- IPC
- CrPC
- settlement
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 31482 of 2026
Vijay Pal And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kuldeep Singh Chahar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. On the request of learned counsel for applicants, this matter is being taken
up out of turn considering the urgency.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for State.
3. The present application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of
ST No.1935 of 2024 (State vs. Vijay Pal and Others) arising out of Case
Crime No.455 of 2020, under sections 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.
Achhnera, District- Agra, pending in the court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Agra, including charge-sheet dated 16.12.2020.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants submitted that
compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified
by learned Additional District Judge 6th, Agra on dated 18.08.2026, which
has been appended with the records of instant application, this fact has also
been ascertained and seconded by learned AGA.
5. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise
has been confirmed and admitted by learned AGA 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.
6. 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 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
NA528 No. 31482 of 2026
2
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.
7. 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.
8. In the case of H.N. Pandakumar Vs. State of Karnataka [2025 INSC
37], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that if the offence is non-
compoundable which is having no serious impact on society then there
would be no harm and error if the proceedings may be quashed in light of
the compromise entered into between the parties.
9. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the
case, the entire proceedings of ST No.1935 of 2024 (State vs. Vijay Pal and
Others) arising out of Case Crime No.455 of 2020, under sections 323, 325,
504, 506 IPC, P.S. Achhnera, District- Agra, pending in the court of learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Agra, including charge-sheet dated
16.12.2020, are hereby quashed.
10. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed.
11. 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
Saif
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…