Allahabad High Court
DHANI SHARAN GUPTA AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court held that the criminal proceedings may 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 CrPC seeking to quash the charge sheet and proceedings (Case No. 547 of 2021) relating to offences under Sections 147, 323, 427, 504 and 506 IPC. A compromise verification report confirmed that the parties had amicably settled the dispute, and both sides consented to the quash. The court relied on Supreme Court precedents (Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Angre, and H.N. Pandakumar v. State of Karnataka) which allow quashing of non‑compoundable offences where continuation would be futile and justice demands settlement. Accordingly, the High Court held that the proceedings could be dismissed without prejudice to the law. The application was allowed and the criminal proceedings against the applicants were quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings for non‑compoundable offences under the IPC can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties under Section 528 CrPC.
- Whether the Supreme Court judgments cited provide sufficient authority to quash the proceedings despite the offences not being compoundable.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 323, 427, 504, 506
Subjects
- quash of criminal proceedings
- compromise settlement
- non‑compoundable offences
- Section 528 CrPC
- IPC offences
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34915 of 2026
Dhani Sharan Gupta And 4 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Qaisar Kamal Ansari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mohd Khalid Ansari, Mohd.
Warish Khan
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. This matter is being taken up out of turn from the category of cases
which have been mentioned in the morning on account of urgency. Heard
learned counsel for parties.
2. Present application has been preferred with a prayer to quash charge sheet
dated 23.2.2021, cognizance order dated 16.11.2021 along with entire
proceeding of Case no. 547 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime no. 0012 of
2021 under sections 147, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC, PS- Shahganj, District-
Prayagraj.
3. In compliance of earlier order passed by this Court, compromise
verification report has already been received from learned concerned court
and the same is appended to order sheet wherein it is mentioned that
compromise has been verified in presence of both the parties.
4. Learned counsels for respondents showed no objection to aforesaid
contention of learned counsel for applicants.
5. From perusal of records, it transpires that the parties have amicably settled
their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by
learned counsel for the parties and it has been submitted that there would be
no harm and error and it would be in the interest of justice that the
proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise.
6. A three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v.
NA528 No. 34915 of 2026
2
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
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.
7. 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.
8. In case of H.N.Pandakumar vs. State of Karnataka [2025 INSC 37],
Hon'ble Apex Court has also observed that if the offence is non-
compoundable which is having no serious impact on society then there
would be no harm and error if the proceedings may be quashed in light of
the compromise entered into between the parties.
9. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire
proceeding of Case no. 547 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime no. 0012 of
2021 under sections 147, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC, PS- Shahganj, District-
Prayagraj, are hereby quashed, only in respect of applicants herein.
10. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed.
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
September 28, 2026
Shaswat
Digitally signed by :-
SHASWAT SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…