Allahabad High Court

ASHOK AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 29 September 2026
Bench: SAMIT GOPAL

Holding

The High Court quashed the entire Special Trial proceeding on the ground that the parties had settled their grievances.

Summary

The applicants Ashok, Gangaram, Vinod and Pramod filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash Special Trial No. 293 of 2016, which involved charges under IPC sections 323, 504, 506, 325 and Section 3(1)(X) of the SC/ST Act. A coordinate bench of the Allahabad High Court had earlier ordered the parties to file a compromise deed, which was verified by the Special Judge on 3 April 2025. The opposite parties returned the compensation awarded, and the State raised no objection to the settlement. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow quashing of criminal proceedings where the parties have settled, the Court held that it could exercise its power to quash the case. The application was allowed and the entire proceeding, including the charge sheet and cognizance order, was quashed.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal proceeding under the IPC and SC/ST Act can be quashed on the basis of a settlement between the parties under Section 528 of the BNSS.
Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order in a Special Trial under the SC/ST Act.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 325, 504, 506
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(X)

Subjects

settlement
quash of criminal proceedings
Section 528 BNSS
compromise deed
SC/ST Act
IPC offences
High Court jurisdiction

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37705 of 2026

Ashok And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Yogesh Kumar Tiwari

Court No. - 76
HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Mahesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants,
Sri Yogesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 to
4 and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the
records.

3. The present application under Sections 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicants Ashok, Gangaram, Vinod and Pramod with the prayer to
allow the present application and quash the entire proceedings of Special
Trial No. 293 of 2016, State Vs. Ashok and others, under Sections 323,
504, 506, 325 I.P.C. and section 3(1)(X) of S.C./S.T. Act, arising out of
Case Crime No. 291 of 2015, P.S.- Gursarai, District Jhansi, pending in
the court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jhansi and with a further prayer to
stay the further proceedings of the said case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants states that an order was passed by a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.02.2025 in
Application U/s 4918 of 2025 (Ashok and 3 others Vs. State of U.P. and 3
others) directing the applicants to file the compromise deed before the
court concerned which was to be verified by the court concerned. In
pursuance of the said order, the court concerned vide order dated
03.04.2025 verified the said compromise, copy of the same is annexure 7
to the affidavit. The same is not disputed by learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2 to 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 to 4
while placing short counter affidavit dated 25.09.2026 which is on record
submits that they have returned the amount of entire compensation
awarded to them in the appropriate head of the government, para 7 and
annexure S.A.1 being the treasury challan to the same has been placed
before the Court.

5. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the said proposition.
NA528 No. 37705 of 2026
2

6. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement
arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of
(1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4
SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation :
(2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16
SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5)
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC
278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and
others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that
the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be
quashed.

7. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court
on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising
powers by this Court to quash the proceedings, charge sheet as well as
cognizance/summoning order as prayed for by the applicant(s).

8. The present application is allowed.

9. The entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

(Samit Gopal,J.)
September 30, 2026
M. ARIF

Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…