Allahabad High Court
SAURABH KUMAR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The Court held that, given the verified compromise and lack of public interest, the criminal proceedings must be quashed.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court entertained an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 110 of 2024 (State vs. Saurabh Kumar et al.) which involved offences under Sections 498‑A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicants and the second opposite party had amicably settled the dispute and a compromise was verified by the trial court on 18‑01‑2025. Both parties, including the State, expressed that the prosecution should be withdrawn as the compromise removed any public interest in continuing the case. The Court referred to Supreme Court precedents allowing compromise even in cognizable and non‑compoundable offences. Finding no useful purpose in prolonging the trial, the Court quashed the entire criminal proceedings and allowed the Section 528 application.
Issues considered
- Whether a court may quash criminal proceedings on the basis of a verified compromise in cases involving cognizable and non‑compoundable offences.
- Whether Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. can be invoked to terminate prosecution after a settlement between the parties.
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 offence
- Section 528
- Section 482
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- High Court
- Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37563 of 2026
Saurabh Kumar And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Laxmi Narayan Rathour
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Sri Laxmi Narayan Rathour, learned counsel for the applicants,
Sri Jyoti Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
record.
2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed with
the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 110 of
2024 (State vs. Saurabh Kumar and others), arising out of Case Crime No.
13 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 1.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act,
Police Station Mahila Thana Orai, District Jalaun.
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 Application under Section 482
No. 30881 of 2024 with prayer to quash the proceedings in terms of
compromise entered between the parties and this Court vide order dated
19.11.2024 directed the parties to appear before the trial court for
verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide
order dated 18.01.2025 verified the parties as well as compromise
application. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2
have settled their dispute through compromise 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.
NA528 No. 37563 of 2026
2
4. Learned A.G.A. submitted that both the parties have settled their
dispute out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.
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, entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 110 of 2024
(State vs. Saurabh Kumar and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 13
of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 1.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act,
Police Station Mahila Thana Orai, District Jalaun, are hereby quashed in
terms of compromise.
8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 9, 2026
Rmk.
Digitally signed by :-
RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…