Allahabad High Court
ANURAG SHARMA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The Court held that where the parties have settled their dispute, the criminal proceedings may be quashed under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Summary
The applicants, Anurag Sharma and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet dated 22‑12‑2021 and the related warrant trial (No. 1670 of 2022) arising from offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They claimed that a compromise was reached on 20‑05‑2026 and was verified by the trial court. The State’s Additional Government Advocate admitted the compromise and raised no objection to quashing. The High Court examined the settled law that criminal proceedings may be dismissed when parties have amicably resolved their dispute, citing several Supreme Court precedents. Finding the compromise genuine and in accordance with law, the Court exercised its power under Section 528 CrPC and quashed the entire proceedings against the applicants.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act can be quashed under Section 528 CrPC on the basis of a compromise between the parties.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 504, 506
Subjects
- settlement
- quash
- Section 528 CrPC
- criminal procedure
- compromise
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- IPC offences
- High Court
- Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34919 of 2026
Anurag Sharma And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Preete Chaudhary
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Ms. Priya Maddhesiya, learned Counsel holding brief of Ms.
Preete Chaudhary, 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 allow the present application and to quash the entire proceeding/charge
sheet dated 22.12.2021 on the basis of compromise entered between the parties dated
20.05.2026, the Warrant Trial No. 1670 of 2022 (State Versus Anurag and another)
arising out of Case Crime No. 0309 of 2021 under section 498A, 323, 504, 506 of
I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, 1961, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District Mathura, as
well as Cognizance order dated 18.02.2022 in the Warrant Trial No. 1670 of 2022
(State Versus Anurag and another), pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior
Division), Fast Track Court, (Crime Against Women), Judicial Magistrate, Mathura."
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.
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
NA528 No. 34919 of 2026
2
applicants.
5. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered
into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.
5. 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.
6. Upon perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on
the subject, this is a fit case for exercising powers of this Court to quash the
proceedings, as prayed for by the applicants.
7. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case, insofar as the present to the
present applicants, are hereby quashed.
8. The present application is allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 28, 2026
Vijay
Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…