Allahabad High Court

SHAMU LAL CHAKRAWAL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 7 September 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The Court held that, given the valid compromise and established Supreme Court jurisprudence permitting settlement in certain non‑compoundable offences, the charge sheet and the entire criminal proceeding must be quashed.

Summary

The applicants, Shamu Lal Chakrawal and two others, filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash a charge sheet dated 19‑12‑2025 and the related criminal proceedings (Case No. 59715 of 2026) involving offences under Sections 498‑A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They claimed that the dispute with opposite party No.2 had been amicably settled through a compromise, and the opposite party was willing to withdraw the prosecution. The Additional Government Advocate (AGA) raised no objection to the quash. The 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 charge sheet and the entire proceeding were quashed, and the application was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether a compromise between the parties can be the basis for quashing criminal proceedings in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences such as those under Sections 498‑A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Whether the High Court can entertain an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. to quash a charge sheet and pending criminal case on the ground of settlement.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 528
Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498-A, 504, 506

Subjects

compromise
quash of criminal proceedings
non‑compoundable offences
Section 528 B.N.S.S.
dowry prohibition
settlement
high court

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37159 of 2026

Shamu Lal Chakrawal And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Sri Vijay Bahadur, Advocate filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite
party No.2, is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Srivastava learned counsel for applicants, Sri
Vijay Bahadur, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and learned AGA
for the State.

3. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by
the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 19.12.2025
and entire proceeding of Case No. 59715 of 2026 (State Vs. Shamu Lal
Chakrawal and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 207 of 2025, under
sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act, Police Station Chetganj, District Varanasi.

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 10.7.2026 passed in Application U/S
528 BNSS No.27169 of 2026, directed the parties to appear before the
trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial
NA528 No. 37159 of 2026
2

court vide order dated 15.7.2026 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
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 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. Accordingly, the charge sheet dated 19.12.2025 and entire proceeding
of Case No. 59715 of 2026 (State Vs. Shamu Lal Chakrawal and others)
arising out of Case Crime No. 207 of 2025, under sections 498-A, 323,
504 and 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station
Chetganj, District Varanasi are hereby quashed.
NA528 No. 37159 of 2026
3

9. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.

(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 8, 2026
Md Faisal

Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…