Allahabad High Court
MOHD. GHAIURULLAH AND 5 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The High Court held that even non‑compoundable offences may be compromised between parties, and therefore the trial court’s order rejecting the compromise was invalid.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash an order dated 2 August 2025 passed by the Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Ballia, which had rejected a compromise entered on 3 April 2025 in a criminal case involving offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 504, 506 and 436 of the IPC. The trial court held that the offences were non‑compoundable and therefore the compromise could not be accepted. The applicants contended that the Apex Court has held that even non‑compoundable offences may be compromised, and the High Court agreed, relying on the decision in Krishna Avtar Mishra v. State of U.P. The High Court set aside the trial court’s order as contrary to that precedent and allowed the application, thereby quashing the proceedings against the applicants.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise can be accepted in cases involving non‑compoundable offences under the IPC.
- Whether the order rejecting the compromise is maintainable under the law.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 528
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 436, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- non‑compoundable offences
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
- quash order
- High Court
- Section 528 BNSS
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39059 of 2026
Mohd. Ghaiurullah And 5 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anshul Kumar Gupta, Indra
Jit Singh, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard Sri Indra Jit Singh, learned counsel for applicants, Sri
Saqib Ahmed, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and
learned AGA for State.
2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash
order dated 2.8.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (E.C.
Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Ballia in Session Trial no.
1415 of 2024 (State vs. Ghaiurullah and others) arising out of
Case Crime no. 0058 of 2020 under sections 147, 148, 149,
308, 323, 504, 506, 436 IPC, PS- Ubhaon, District Ballia
whereby compromise dated 3.4.2025 entered between the
parties has been rejected.
3. Learned counsel for applicants submitted that both the
parties entered into a compromise dated 3.4.2025 and appeared
before learned court concerned for verification of compromise,
but learned Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions
Judge, Ballia vide impugned order dated 2.8.2025, after
verifying the compromise observed that offence in the present
case is non-compoundable which cannot be compromised by
the parties and as such rejected the same.
4. Learned counsel for applicants submitted that impugned
order dated 2.8.2025 is not sustainable in the eye of law since it
NA528 No. 39059 of 2026
2
has been laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of
judgments that proceedings can be quashed on basis of
compromise even in case of implication under non-
compoundable offences and as such no ground was available
before court concerned to reject the same.
5. Per contra, Sri Saqib Ahmed, learned counsel for opposite
party no. 2 submitted the same arguments as advanced by
learned counsel for the applicants. Learned AGA for State
seconded the argument raised by learned counsel for opposite
party no. 2.
6. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel
for the parties, this Court finds that although compromise has
been verified but the same has been rejected by learned court
of Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Ballia
on the basis of non-compoundable offences. In catena of
judgments rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court which has been
considered in Application u/s 482 no. 37160 of 2024 (Krishna
Avtar Mishra vs. State of U.P. and another) decided on
28.4.2025 by this Court, it has already been settled that even
the offences which comes under the category of non-
compoundable can also be compromised between the parties.
The dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court is crystal clear for settling
the dispute persisting in the society just to maintain the
harmony and peace between the parties and as such the essence
of categorization of compoundable and non-compoundable has
already been settled by Hon'ble Apex Court.
7. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances,
impugned order dated 2.8.2025 passed by learned Special
Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Ballia is contrary
to the dictum pronounced by Hon'ble Apex Court and the same
is hereby set aside.
8. On the basis of compromise which has been entered by both
the parties and has been verified by learned court concerned,
NA528 No. 39059 of 2026
3
entire proceeding of Session Trial no. 1415 of 2024 (State vs.
Ghaiurullah and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 0058 of
2020 under sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 504, 506, 436
IPC, PS- Ubhaon, District Ballia are hereby set aside only in
respect of applicants herein.
9. The instant application u/s 528 BNSS stands allowed
accordingly.
September 23, 2026
Shaswat
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHASWAT SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…