Allahabad High Court
ASHRAF AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The court held that the proceedings are quashed as the compromise between the parties serves no useful purpose to continue the prosecution.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the charge sheet and criminal proceedings relating to several IPC offences, the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, on the ground that they had amicably settled with the second opposite party. The trial court verified the parties and the compromise application. The State’s Additional Government Advocate raised no objection to the compromise. The court relied on Supreme Court precedents that permit compromise even in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences. Finding that continuation of the prosecution would serve no useful purpose, the court quashed the proceedings against the applicants and allowed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between parties can lead to quash of proceedings in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.
- Whether the court may dismiss a charge sheet and criminal case on the basis of an out‑of‑court settlement.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 354, 354-B, 376-D, 427, 498-A, 506
- Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, 2019 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- compromise
- non-compoundable offences
- Section 528
- quash of proceedings
- criminal procedure
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Muslim Women Protection Act
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35756 of 2025
Ashraf And 5 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Syed Faiz Hasnain
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Sri Syed Faiz Hasnain, learned counsel for applicants and
learned AGA for the State.
2. The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. has been
filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash charge sheet no. 113 of
2022 dated 30.07.2022 along with cognizance order dated 17.08.2022,
and entire proceeding of Case crime no. 72 of 2022, under Sections 323,
498-A, 427, 506 IPC read with 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, and 3/4
Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act 2019 in so for
relates to applicant no.1 and for applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4 under section
323, 354, 354-B, 376-D, 498-A, 427, 506 IPC read with 3/4 Dowry
Prohibition Act, and 3/4 Muslim Women (Protection of Right on
Marriage) Act 2019, Police Station Dilari District Moradabad
3. 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 17.9.2025, directed the parties to
appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 13.10.2025 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
submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through
NA528 No. 35756 of 2025
2
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.
4. Learned AGA 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 he has no objection, if the
proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Accordingly, the proceedings of aforesaid case are hereby quashed in
respect of present applicants.
8. This application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. is accordingly
allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
October 1, 2026
Md Faisal
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…