Allahabad High Court

HEMANT KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The court held that, in view of the parties' settlement and Supreme Court authority, the criminal proceedings should be quashed.

Summary

The applicants, Hemant Kumar and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the charge sheet and proceedings in Criminal Case No. 1424 of 2025, which involved offences under IPC sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506. The applicants asserted that they had reached an amicable settlement with the second opposite party, who also consented to withdraw the prosecution. Both parties presented the compromise to the trial court, which verified the settlement, and the opposite party expressed no objection to quashing the case. The High Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents that permit 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 all proceedings against the applicants, and allowed the application under Section 528.

Issues considered

Whether a compromise between parties can be permitted to quash proceedings in cases involving cognizable, non‑compoundable offences under IPC sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506.
Whether Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. empowers the court to dismiss the charge sheet and proceedings on the basis of such a compromise.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 504, 506

Subjects

compromise
quash of criminal proceedings
Section 528
non‑compoundable offences
IPC
settlement
High Court
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34641 of 2025

Hemant Kumar And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashutosh Shukla, G.A.

Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for applicants, Sri
Ashutosh Shukla, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and learned
AGA for the State.

3. 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
05.05.2024, cognizance and summoning order dated 27.01.2025 passed
by the learned court of Additional Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2,
Meerut and the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1424 of 2025
(State Vs Hemant Kumar and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 122
of 2024, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC, Police Station T.P.
Nagar, District Meerut.

4. 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 10.9.2025, 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
NA528 No. 34641 of 2025
2

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
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.

5. 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.

6. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute
out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. Accordingly, the charge sheet dated 05.05.2024, cognizance and
summoning order dated 27.01.2025 passed by the learned court of
Additional Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Meerut and the entire
proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1424 of 2025 (State Vs Hemant Kumar
and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 122 of 2024, under Sections
NA528 No. 34641 of 2025
3

498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC, Police Station T.P. Nagar, District Meerut
are hereby quashed in respect of present applicants.

10. 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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…