Allahabad High Court

HARISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The court held that where a verified compromise exists, proceedings for cognizable, non‑compoundable offences may be quashed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash charge sheet No. 46 of 2022 and the related criminal proceedings arising under Sections 498A, 323, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act. The parties had amicably settled their dispute outside court, and the compromise was verified by the trial court. The opposite party (Party No.2) expressed no objection to withdrawing the prosecution. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow compromise even in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences, the High Court held that continuing the case would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the charge sheet and all proceedings were quashed and the application was allowed.

Issues considered

Can a compromise between parties lead to the quash of pending criminal proceedings in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act?
Does Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. empower the court to dismiss such proceedings on the basis of a verified compromise?

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 528
D.P. Act — s. 3, 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 506

Subjects

compromise
quash of criminal proceedings
Section 528
non‑compoundable offences
IPC
D.P. Act
High Court
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37897 of 2025

Harish Chandra Sharma And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dharmendra Kumar Patel, Rajneesh
Ranjan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashutosh Singh Gautam, Anup Kumar
Khare, G.A., Kundan Kumar

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

1. Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar Patel, learned counsel for applicants, Sri
Ashutosh Singh Gautam, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and
learned AGA for the State.

2. The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. has been
filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge sheet No. 46 of
2022 dated 26.03.2022, cognizance/ summoning order dated 4.9.2023,
passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Allahabad and
the entire proceeding of Case No. 148 of 2023 (State Vs Durgesh Singh &
Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 499 of 2021, under Sections 498A,
323, 506 of I.P.C & Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Nawabganj,
District Prayagraj.

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 this application with prayer to
quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the
parties, this Court vide order dated 26.9.2025, directed the parties to
appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 1.11.2025 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
NA528 No. 37897 of 2025
2

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.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 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 opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in
the aforesaid case are quashed.

5. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute
out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

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 No. 46 of 2022 dated 26.03.2022,
cognizance/ summoning order dated 4.9.2023, passed by learned
Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Allahabad and the entire
proceeding of Case No. 148 of 2023 (State Vs Durgesh Singh & Others),
arising out of Case Crime No. 499 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323,
NA528 No. 37897 of 2025
3

506 of I.P.C & Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Nawabganj,
District Prayagraj are hereby quashed in respect of present applicants.

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

(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 29, 2026
Md Faisal

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…