Allahabad High Court
IMRAN AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P THROUGH IT INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS AT LUCKNOW AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The Court held that, given the parties' settlement, the proceedings could be quashed despite the offences being cognizable and non‑compoundable.
Summary
The applicants, Imran and six others, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the charge sheet and related proceedings after reaching an out‑of‑court settlement with one of the opposite parties. The trial court verified the compromise, and the State agreed to withdraw prosecution. The High Court considered precedents that allow compromise even in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences. Relying on those decisions, the Court held that continuing the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the charge sheet, cognizance order, and all proceedings were quashed, and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between parties can be permitted to quash proceedings in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences under Section 528 BNSS.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 351(3), 352, 528, 85
- D.P Act, P.S Aurangabad — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- compromise
- non‑compoundable offence
- quash proceedings
- Section 528
- cognizable offence
- settlement
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38304 of 2026
Imran And 6 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P Through It Inspector General Of
Prisons At Lucknow And Another .....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pushpendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Sri Shahrukh Khan, Advocate holding brief of Sri Pushpendra
Singh, 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 charge sheet dated 21.05.2025, cognizance order
dated 09.01.2026 and entire proceedings of Case No. 62 of 2026 (State
Vs. Imran and others) in case Crime No. 0143 of 2025, under Sections 85,
352, 351(3) of B.N.S and 3/4 of D.P Act, P.S Aurangabad, District
Bulandshahr.
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.11092 of 2026 with prayer to quash the proceedings in terms
of compromise entered between the parties and this Court vide order
dated 28.03.2026 directed the parties to appear before the trial court for
verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide
order dated 14.05.2026 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. 38304 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, charge sheet dated 21.05.2025, cognizance order dated
09.01.2026 and entire proceedings of Case No. 62 of 2026 (State Vs.
Imran and others) in case Crime No. 0143 of 2025, under Sections 85,
352, 351(3) of B.N.S and 3/4 of D.P Act, P.S Aurangabad, District
Bulandshahr, are hereby quashed in terms of compromise.
8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 11, 2026
Rmk.
Digitally signed by :-
RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…