Allahabad High Court
NISHANT SINGH @ SONU SINGH AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- NAND PRABHA SHUKLA
Holding
The High Court held that the verification of the compromise must be undertaken by the trial court, and therefore did not quash the criminal proceedings at this stage.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Case No. 10665 of 2024) arising from alleged offences under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act. They argued that a compromise dated 27‑02‑2026 had been reached in the parallel matrimonial proceeding under Section 13‑B of the Hindu Marriage Act, making the continuation of the criminal case unnecessary and an abuse of process. The State contended that only the trial court can verify the existence and validity of the compromise and that the applicants should approach that court. The High Court, without expressing any view on the merits, directed both parties to appear before the trial court with the certified compromise for verification and ordered that no coercive action be taken pending that verification. The Court left open the possibility of a later application for quashing after the compromise is verified. The application was therefore disposed of without being granted.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding can be quashed on the basis of a compromise reached in a matrimonial suit under Section 13‑B of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to verify the compromise or if that jurisdiction lies solely with the trial court.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- D.P. Act — s. 3, 4
- Hindu Marriage Act — s. 13-B
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 504, 506
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- quash
- compromise
- Section 528
- Hindu Marriage Act
- abuse of process
- verification of compromise
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39044 of 2025
Nishant Singh @ Sonu Singh And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shiv Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Sri Shiv Kumar 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 to
allow this application and to quash the entire proceeding of the Case No.
10665 of 2024 and charge sheet dated 11.11.2023 and cognizance order
dated 10.05.2024, State vs. Nishant @ Sonu, arising out of case crime no.
0183 of 2023 under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3/4
D.P. Act, P.S. Gajner, District Kanpur Dehat, pending in the court of
learned Judicial Magistrate-1st, Kanpur Dehat.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in a proceeding under
section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, the applicants and opposite party
no. 2 have moved the compromise dated 27.2.2026 placed as Annexure
No.1 to the supplementary affidavit dated 29.3.2026. Therefore, no
useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the
Court concerned and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the
Court but also abuse of process of law.
4. Learned A.G.A., however, submits that it is the Trial Court, which has
to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise,
hence the applicants may approach the concerned Court and move an
application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be
decided in accordance with law.
NA528 No. 39044 of 2025
2
5. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, both the parties are directed to appear in person before the Trial
Court along with compromise as well certified copy of this order within
three weeks from today. It is expected that Court concerned may fix a
date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the
presence of the parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same
in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, after giving
opportunity of hearing to both the parties, preferably within a period of
three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order,
if there is no other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying
the compromise, the Court concerned shall also record the statements of
the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the
original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not.
6. The Court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy
of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants
to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
7. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court
concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the
aforesaid case.
8. With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of.
(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
May 7, 2026
Puspendra
Digitally signed by :-
PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…