Allahabad High Court

MOHD. AZAM AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 20 September 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The court held that where the parties have settled their dispute and the compromise is verified, the criminal proceedings may be quashed.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 1678 of 2021, Crime No. 544 of 2021) that alleged offences under Sections 498‑A, 504, 377 IPC, Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 3/4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019. The applicants asserted that they had reached a compromise with the complainant, which was verified by the trial court. The Additional Government Advocate admitted the compromise and raised no objection to quashing the case. The High Court, relying on established Supreme Court jurisprudence that settled criminal disputes may be dismissed, ordered the entire proceedings against the applicants to be quashed. The application was allowed, resulting in the dismissal of the charge‑sheet and the cognizance‑cum‑summoning order.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal proceeding can be quashed on the basis of a compromise/settlement between the parties under Section 528 BNSS.
Whether the compromise, once verified by the trial court, extinguishes liability for offences under Sections 498‑A, 504, 377 IPC and the applicable provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.

Legislation cited

Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 377, 498-A, 504
Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 — s. 3, 4

Subjects

settlement
quash criminal proceeding
Section 528 BNSS
compromise
IPC offences
Dowry Prohibition Act
Muslim Women Protection Act
Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39921 of 2026

Mohd. Azam And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mansoor Ahmad, Mohd Farhan
Siddiqui
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Heard Mr. Mohd Farhan Siddiqui, learned Counsel for the applicants
and learned AGA for the State and perused the records.

2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicants with the following prayer:

"It is, Therefore, Most Respectfully Prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be
pleased to allow the Present Criminal Misc. Application (U/s 528 of B.N.S.S.) and to
Quash/drop the entire Criminal Proceeding initiated against the Applicants arising
out of Case No. 1678 of 2021 (State Vs. Mohd. Yusuf And Others) relating to Case
Crime No. 544 of 2021 Under Section 498-A, 504, 377, I.P.C. And Section 3/4 D.P.
Act and Section 3/4 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act 2019,
Police Station Karely, district Prayagraj, Pending in the Court of learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 7 Allahabad as well as Quash the Impugned
Charge-sheet No. 613/21 dated 03/10/2021 (Annexure No. 4) submitted by the Police
in Case Crime No. 544 of 2021 as well as Impugned Cognizance-Cum-Summoning
Order dated 11/10/2021 (Annexure No. 5) Passed by learned Judicial Magistrate,
Court No. 4 Allahabad against the Applicants in the aforesaid Case."

3. Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants
and opposite party no.2 have compromised the dispute. It is further
argued that the said compromise has also been verified by the concerned
Trial Court, as such the proceedings against the applicants may be
quashed.
NA528 No. 39921 of 2026
2

4. Learned A.G.A. admitted the fact of compromise and stated that he has
no objection if the proceeding of the aforesaid case is quashed against the
applicants.

5. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered
into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.

6. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement
arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of
(1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4
SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation :
(2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16
SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5)
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC
278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur
and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has
held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can
be quashed.

7. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court
on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising
powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the
applicants.

8. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case with regard to the present
applicants are hereby quashed.

9. The present application is allowed.

(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 21, 2026
Vijay

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…