Allahabad High Court

DUSHYANT KUMAR AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 27 September 2026
Bench: SAURABH SRIVASTAVA

Holding

The High Court quashed the charge‑sheet, cognizance order and all proceedings, holding that the compromise justified dismissal of the non‑compoundable offences.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge-sheet, cognizance order and all proceedings in a criminal case (Case No. 17518 of 2026) arising from offences under IPC sections 109(1), 115(2), 352 and 351(2). The applicants asserted that a compromise had been reached and was verified by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, a fact also admitted by the opposite party. Both parties jointly requested that the proceedings be dismissed in the interest of justice. The High Court relied on Supreme Court precedents (Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Madhavrao Scindia v. Angre) which permit quashing of non‑compoundable criminal proceedings where a genuine settlement exists. Consequently, the Court held that continuation of the case would be futile and ordered the entire criminal proceeding to be quashed. The application was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal proceeding for non‑compoundable offences can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties.
Whether Section 528 CrPC empowers the High Court to dismiss the charge‑sheet and proceedings in such circumstances.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 109(1), 115(2), 351(2), 352

Subjects

compromise
quash criminal proceedings
non‑compoundable offences
Section 528 CrPC
settlement
High Court
criminal justice

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34971 of 2026

Dushyant Kumar And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anmol Kumar Dubey, Ishwar Chandra
Tyagi
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
24.12.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 06.06.2025 and the
entire proceedings of Case No.17518 of 2026, (State vs. Dushyant Kumar
and others) arising out of Case Crime No.178 of 2025, under sections
109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, P.S. Jarcha, District Gautambuddh
Nagar, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate-I, Gautambuddh Nagar.

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-I, Gautambuddh
Nagar on dated 10.09.2026, 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
NA528 No. 34971 of 2026
2

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.

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 24.12.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated
06.06.2025 and the entire proceedings of Case No.17518 of 2026, (State
vs. Dushyant Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No.178 of
2025, under sections 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, P.S. Jarcha,
District Gautambuddh Nagar, pending in the court of learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Gautambuddh Nagar, 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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…