Allahabad High Court
MANI GUPTA AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The High Court held that the criminal proceedings must be quashed as the dispute was settled and continuation would be futile, even though the offences are non‑compoundable.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a charge-sheet and related proceedings arising from offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 131, 352 and 351(2) of the Indian Penal Code. The parties had reached a compromise, which was verified by the Chief Judicial Magistrate and acknowledged by both sides. Relying on Supreme Court decisions in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Angre (1988), the Court held that continuation of the criminal proceeding would be futile and contrary to the ends of justice. Consequently, the High Court quashed the charge-sheet, the cognizance order and the entire case. The application was allowed, and the proceedings were terminated.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding for non‑compoundable offences can be quashed under Section 528 CrPC when the parties have settled the dispute.
- Whether the existence of a verified compromise justifies the termination of the proceedings despite the nature of the offences.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 131, 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528 CrPC
- compromise
- non‑compoundable offences
- Indian Penal Code
- Supreme Court precedent
- justice
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 33083 of 2026
Mani Gupta And 5 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravi Sahu
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
24.09.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 05.06.2026 and the entire
proceedings of Case No.20820 of 2026, arising out of Case Crime No.205
of 2025, under sections 316(2), 318(4), 131, 352, 351(2) BNS, P.S.
Akbarpur, District Kanpur Dehat, pending in the court of learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat.
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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat on dated
25.08.2026, 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. 33083 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 24.09.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated
05.06.2026 and the entire proceedings of Case No.20820 of 2026, arising
out of Case Crime No.205 of 2025, under sections 316(2), 318(4), 131,
352, 351(2) BNS, P.S. Akbarpur, District Kanpur Dehat, pending in the
court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Dehat, 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…