Allahabad High Court

AKSHAYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 18 March 2026
Bench: SANJIV KUMAR

Holding

The Court held that its inherent jurisdiction may be exercised to quash criminal proceedings where a verified compromise between the parties demonstrates that the dispute is purely private and has no wider social impact.

Summary

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash Criminal Case No.1862 of 2025, which arose from Crime No.279 of 2024 and was filed under Sections 318(4), 332(C) and 351(2) of the BNSS. Both parties jointly submitted that they had entered into a compromise, which was verified by the trial court in a report dated 25.02.2026, and the State’s Additional Government Advocate conceded the existence of the settlement. The High Court examined the inherent powers of the court, citing precedents such as Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, which allow the court to intervene to ensure real and substantial justice. It held that where a dispute is of a private nature and the parties have mutually settled, continuing criminal proceedings serves no useful purpose. Consequently, the Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to quash the entire criminal proceeding. The application was allowed and the case was dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 528 BNSS on the basis of a verified compromise between the parties
Whether the inherent powers of the court may be invoked to terminate a criminal case that has become a private dispute

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 318(4), 332(C), 351(2), 528

Subjects

compromise
inherent jurisdiction
quash of criminal proceedings
Section 528 BNSS
private dispute
criminal law

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38874 of 2025

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Padmaker Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Shubham Srivastava, G.A.

Court No. - 84
HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J.

1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on
record.

2. Heard Sri Padmaker Pandey, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned
A.G.A. for the State, Sri Shubham Srivastava, learned Counsel for the
opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

3. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant
to quash entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.1862 of 2025 arising out of
Case Crime No.279 of 2024, under Sections 318 (4), 332 (C) and 351 (2)
BNSS, Police Station Jhinjhana, District Shamli as well as charge-sheet
dated 31.12.2024 and summoning order dated 12.03.2025.

4. Learned Counsel for the applicant as well as opposite party No.2 jointly
submitted that vide order dated 04.02.2026 a direction was given to the Trial
Court to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In
pursuance of the aforesaid order, learned Trial Court had verified the
contents of compromise.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for opposite party
no. 2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which
has duly been verified by the Trial Court vide report dated 25.02.2026.

6. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected
between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the Trial Court.

7. Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power
can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh
Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of
NA528 No. 38874 of 2025
2

Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab,
(2014) 6 SCC 466. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the
process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at
between the parties.

8. In view of the aforesaid facts and considering that the parties do not wish
to pursue the case any further, the dispute is essentially of a private nature
and has no wider social impact. Since it has been mutually settled between
the parties by way of a compromise, no useful purpose would be served by
proceeding with the matter further.

9. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed
and entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.1862 of 2025 arising out of Case
Crime No.279 of 2024, under Sections 318 (4), 332 (C) and 351 (2) BNSS,
Police Station Jhinjhana, District Shamli as well as charge-sheet dated
31.12.2024 and summoning order dated 12.03.2025 are hereby quashed.

March 19, 2026
Amit
(Sanjiv Kumar,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
AMIT KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…