Allahabad High Court

DEEPAK RANA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 15 September 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The High Court held that, given the parties' settlement and the absence of any public interest, the criminal proceedings could be quashed under Section 528 of the BNSS.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the charge sheet and related proceedings in a criminal case involving sections of the Dowry Prohibition Act and other offences, on the ground that they had reached an out‑of‑court compromise with the State. Both parties, including the State represented by the Attorney General, affirmed that the dispute was settled and the State was willing to withdraw prosecution. The court examined precedents where the Supreme Court allowed compromise even in cognizable and non‑compoundable offences. Considering the settlement and the lack of any public interest in continuing the trial, the court held that proceeding would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the entire proceedings were quashed and the application was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether a compromise between the State and the accused can be permitted in cases involving cognizable and non‑compoundable offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act and other statutes.
Whether the High Court can quash pending criminal proceedings on the basis of such a compromise under Section 528 of the BNSS.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 528
Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4

Subjects

compromise
non‑compoundable offence
quash proceedings
Section 528
Dowry Prohibition Act
criminal procedure
settlement

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39024 of 2026

Deepak Rana And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Samar Singh
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 charge sheet dated 15.05.2025 as well as
cognizance/summoning order dated 21.11.2025 and entire proceedings of
Case No. 42135 of 2025 (State Vs. Deepak Rana and others), arising out
of Case Crime No. 0083 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 85, B.N.S and
Section 3/4 Dowry prohibition Act against applicant nos. 1 and 2 and
under Sections 79, 77, 115(2), 85, B.N.S and under Section 3/4 Dowry
Prohibition Act against the applicant no. 3 and the order dated 21.07.2026
passed by Civil Judge (J.D)/J.M./F.T.C. Ghaziabadm, Police Station-
Shalimar Garden, District Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Civil Judge
(J.D) / F.t.C, Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.

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.32464 of 2026 with prayer to quash the proceedings in terms of
compromise entered between the parties and this Court vide order dated
07.08.2026 directed the parties to appear before the trial court for
verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide
order dated 26.08.2026 verified the parties as well as compromise
application. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2
NA528 No. 39024 of 2026
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
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 the aforesaid case, 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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…