Allahabad High Court
AVNEESH KUMAR YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The High Court allowed the application and quashed the criminal proceedings on the ground of a verified compromise.
Summary
The applicants, Avneesh Kumar Yadav and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 909 of 2025, which involved charges under IPC sections 498‑A, 504, 506 and the Dowry Prohibition Act sections 3 and 4. The parties had amicably settled the dispute outside court, and the trial magistrate had verified the compromise. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow compromise even in certain cognizable, non‑compoundable offences, the High Court held that continuing the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the court quashed the entire criminal proceedings and allowed the application. The decision underscores the permissibility of compromise under Section 528 BNSS in appropriate circumstances.
Issues considered
- Can a compromise between parties lead to the quashing of proceedings in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences under Section 528 of the BNSS Act?
- Whether the High Court may set aside a criminal case on the basis of a verified settlement between the accused and the complainant.
Legislation cited
- BNSS Act — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498-A, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- non‑compoundable offence
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528 BNSS
- IPC 498-A
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- settlement
- judicial verification
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37881 of 2026
Avneesh Kumar Yadav And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surendra Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, 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. 909 of
2025 (State of U.P. Vs. Avneesh Kumar Yadav and others), arising out of
Case Crime No. 104 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 of IPC
and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station- Gaura Badshahpur, District-
Jaunpur, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate Second, District
Jaunpur.
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 528
BNSS No.10249 of 2026 with prayer to quash the proceedings in terms of
compromise entered between the parties and this Court vide order dated
13.04.2026 directed the parties to appear before the trial court for
verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide
order dated 18.06.2026 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
NA528 No. 37881 of 2026
2
prosecution is allowed to go on.
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. 909 of 2025
(State of U.P. Vs. Avneesh Kumar Yadav and others), arising out of Case
Crime No. 104 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 of IPC
and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station- Gaura Badshahpur, District
Jaunpur, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate Second, District
Jaunpur, are hereby quashed in terms of compromise.
8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 16, 2026
Rmk.
Digitally signed by :-
RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…