Allahabad High Court

ANSHUL AGARWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 19 April 2026
Bench: SANJIV KUMAR

Holding

The court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS and quashed the criminal proceedings based on the verified compromise.

Summary

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 32608 of 2014) instituted under IPC sections 406 and 420, on the ground that the parties had entered into a verified compromise dated 23 July 2025. Both the applicant’s counsel and the opposite party’s counsel jointly submitted that the compromise had been verified by the court on 17 March 2026. The learned A.G.A. for the State conceded the existence of the settlement. Relying on the Supreme Court’s authority that inherent powers may be exercised to achieve real and substantial justice, the court held that the dispute was private, had no wider social impact, and therefore the criminal proceedings served no useful purpose. Consequently, the application was allowed and the pending criminal case was quashed.

Issues considered

Whether a court may quash criminal proceedings under Section 528 of the BNSS on the basis of a verified compromise between the parties
Whether the inherent powers of the court can be invoked to terminate a criminal case that has been settled privately

Legislation cited

Bihar Negotiable Settlement Scheme — s. 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420

Subjects

compromise
quash criminal proceedings
inherent jurisdiction
Section 528 BNSS
IPC 406
IPC 420
settlement
procedural law

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37336 of 2025

Anshul Agarwal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Brajesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Brajesh Kumar Singh, G.A., Ravish
Kumar Singh

Court No. - 83
HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J.

1. Heard Mr. Brajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant,
learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., Mr. Rohit Kumar Mishra holding
brief of Sri Ravish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party
no. 2 and perused the record.

2. This application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for
quashing the entire proceedings of Case No.32608 of 2014 ( State Vs.
Anshul Agarwal and others) under Sections 406 & 420 IPC, Police
Station Rail Bazar, District Kanpur Nagar including charge-sheet No.50
of 2014, dated 30.06.2014, cognizance and summoning order dated
12.11.2014 passed by the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate-VII, Kanpur Nagar in Case No.205 of 2013 on the basis of
compromise dated 23.07.2025, pending in the Court of learned Additional
Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)-05, Kanpur Nagar.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants as well as opposite party No.2
jointly submitted that vide order dated 5.01.2026, a direction was given to
the court concerned to verify the factum of compromise executed by the
parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the court concerned had
verified the contents of compromise.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite
party no. 2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into
compromise, which has duly been verified by the court concerned vide
NA528 No. 37336 of 2025
2

order dated 17.03.2026, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure
No.SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit dated 18.04.2026..

5. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected
between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court
below.

6. Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power
can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian
Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others
Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of
Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to
speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the
settlement is arrived at between the parties.

7. In view of the aforesaid facts and considering that the parties do not
wish to pursue the case any further, the dispute is essentially of a private
nature and has no wider social impact. Since it has been mutually settled
between the parties by way of a compromise, no useful purpose would be
served by proceeding with the matter further.

8. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and
Case No.32608 of 2014 ( State Vs. Anshul Agarwal and others) under
Sections 406 & 420 IPC, Police Station Rail Bazar, District Kanpur Nagar
including charge-sheet No.50 of 2014, dated 30.06.2014, cognizance and
summoning order dated 12.11.2014 passed by the Court of Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-VII, Kanpur Nagar in Case No.205 of
2013 on the basis of compromise dated 23.07.2025, pending in the Court
of learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)-05, Kanpur Nagar., pending
in the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Court No.5, Agra, are hereby quashed.

(Sanjiv Kumar,J.)
April 20, 2026
SFH

Digitally signed by :-
SYED FAHIM HUSAIN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…