Allahabad High Court
KAMIL ABBAS AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The court held that where a valid compromise between the parties is established and verified, the criminal proceedings may be quashed.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a summoning order and the criminal case (Criminal Case No. 10503 of 2026) filed under IPC sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354C, as well as sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim Marriage Act. They asserted that the dispute had been amicably settled by compromise, which was verified by the trial court. The State’s Additional Government Advocate admitted the compromise and raised no objection to quashing the proceedings. The High Court, relying on established Supreme Court jurisprudence that criminal matters may be dismissed where parties have settled their grievances, held that the compromise warranted dismissal of the case. Consequently, the court quashed the entire proceedings against the applicants and allowed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings under IPC, the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim Marriage Act can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties under Section 528 BNSS.
Legislation cited
- Bail and Nisi (BNSS) — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 354C, 498A, 504, 506
- Muslim Marriage Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- settlement
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528 BNSS
- IPC offences
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Muslim Marriage Act
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32829 of 2026
Kamil Abbas And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anita Singh, Kumari Poonam Rajpoot,
Prem Babu Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Ms. Anita Singh, learned Counsel for the applicants and learned
AGA for the State and perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicants with the following prayer:
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be
pleased to quash the impugned summoning order dated 8.5.2026 passed by the Ld A.
C. J. M. court no. 6 Agra, U / s - 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and U / s - 3/4 of D.P. act
and U / s - 3/4 of Muslim marriage act against applicant no. 1 and U/s- U/s- 498A,
323, 504, 506 IPC and U / s - 3/4 of D.P. act against applicant no. 2 and U / s - 498A,
323, 504, 506 and 354C, IPC and U / s - 3/4 of D.P. act against applicant no. 3 and U
/ s - 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and U / s - 3/4 of D.P. act, against applicant no. 4 as
well as entire proceeding of criminal Case no. 10503 of 2026, state Vs. Kamil abbas
and others, arising out of case crime no. 57 of 2025, U / s - 498A, 323, 504, 506 and
354C, IPC and U / s - 3/4 of D.P.act and U / s - 3/4 of Muslim marriage act, Police
Station- Rakabganj, District- Agra, Against applicants pending before Ld A. C. J. M.
court no. 6 Agra."
3. Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants
and opposite party no.2 have compromised the dispute. It is further
argued that the said compromise has also been verified by the concerned
Trial Court, as such the proceedings against the applicants may be
quashed.
NA528 No. 32829 of 2026
2
4. Learned A.G.A. admitted the fact of compromise and stated that he has
no objection if the proceeding of the aforesaid case is quashed against the
applicants.
5. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered
into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.
6. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement
arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of
(1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4
SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation :
(2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16
SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5)
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC
278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur
and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has
held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can
be quashed.
7. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court
on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising
powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the
applicants.
8. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case with regard to the present
applicants are hereby quashed.
9. The present application is allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 23, 2026
Vijay
Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…