Allahabad High Court
PRINCE AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The High Court held that the criminal proceedings may be quashed as the parties have amicably settled the dispute, even though the offences are non‑compoundable.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge‑sheet and proceedings in a case involving offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 308 IPC. They asserted that a compromise had been reached and was verified by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, a fact also admitted by the opposite party. The court noted Supreme Court authority that even non‑compoundable offences may be quashed where the dispute is settled and continuation of proceedings would be futile. Relying on the cited precedents, the High Court held that the criminal proceedings should be terminated in the interest of justice. Consequently, the charge‑sheet, cognizance order and the entire case were quashed and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings for non‑compoundable offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 308 IPC can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties.
- Whether Section 528 CrPC permits the High Court to quash such proceedings despite the offences not being compoundable.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 308, 323, 504, 506
Subjects
- quash of criminal proceedings
- compromise
- non‑compoundable offences
- Section 528 CrPC
- settlement
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 33049 of 2026
Prince And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sandip Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated
22.12.2020, cognizance/summoning order dated 02.04.2021 and the entire
proceedings of Case No.3372 of 2021, (State vs. Prince and another)
arising out of Case Crime No.207 of 2020, under sections 323, 504, 506,
308 IPC, P.S. Bhojpur, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.8, Ghaziabad.
3. 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.8,
Ghaziabad on dated 31.08.2026, which has been appended with order
sheet to this application, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded
by learned counsel for opposite parties.
4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise
has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties
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.
5. 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
NA528 No. 33049 of 2026
2
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 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.
6. 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.
7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the
case, charge-sheet dated 22.12.2020, cognizance/summoning order dated
02.04.2021 and the entire proceedings of Case No.3372 of 2021, (State
vs. Prince and another) arising out of Case Crime No.207 of 2020, under
sections 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, P.S. Bhojpur, District Ghaziabad,
pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Court No.8, Ghaziabad, are hereby quashed.
8. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed.
9. 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 28, 2026
Ashish/-
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ASHISH KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…