Allahabad High Court
HARISH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The court held that, given the parties' settlement and the lack of any useful purpose in continuing the prosecution, the criminal proceedings must be quashed.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the charge sheet and criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 10814 of 2022) relating to offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicants and the second opposite party had amicably settled the dispute and the latter expressed willingness to withdraw the prosecution. Both parties, including the State’s AGA, consented to the compromise. The High Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow compromise even in certain cognizable and non‑compoundable offences, held that continuing the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the court quashed the charge sheet, cognizance order and the entire criminal proceedings, and allowed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between parties can lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings for cognizable, non‑compoundable offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. permits the court to dismiss the case on the basis of settlement.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 504
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528
- B.N.S.S.
- non‑compoundable offences
- IPC 498A
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- settlement
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32452 of 2025
Harish And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vivek Singh
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for applicants, Sri
Rochan Rao, Advocate holding brief of Sri Vivek Singh, learned counsel
for opposite party No.2 and learned AGA for the State.
2. The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. has been
filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated
06.07.2022, cognizance/summoning order dated 20.10.2022 and the entire
criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10814 of 2022 (State Versus
Harish and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 260 of 2022, under
Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C., and 3/4 of D.P. Act Police Station
Surajpur, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending in the court of
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Gautam Buddh Nagar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and
opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court.
Applicants approached this Court by filing this application with prayer to
quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the
parties, this Court vide order dated 28.8.2025, directed the parties to
appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 20.9.2025 verified the parties as
well as compromise application. He further submitted that applicants and
opposite party no.2 compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does
not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further
submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through
compromise their dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to
NA528 No. 32452 of 2025
2
press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is
ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the
compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is
allowed to go on.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute
the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the
applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He
submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in
the aforesaid case are quashed.
5. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute
out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.
6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case 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, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has 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 learned counsel 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 charge sheet dated 06.07.2022, cognizance/
summoning order dated 20.10.2022 and the entire criminal proceedings of
Criminal Case No. 10814 of 2022 (State Versus Harish and others),
arising out of Case Crime No. 260 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323,
504 I.P.C., and 3/4 of D.P. Act Police Station Surajpur, District
Gautam Buddh Nagar are hereby quashed in respect of present applicants.
NA528 No. 32452 of 2025
3
9. This application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. is accordingly
allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 29, 2026
Md Faisal
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…