Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

JITENDRA KUMAR VERMA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The High Court held that where the parties have settled their dispute, the criminal proceedings may be quashed, and accordingly quashed the charge sheet and cognizance order.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a charge sheet and cognizance order relating to offences under sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of the BNSS and sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act. The applicants asserted that they had reached a compromise with the second opposite party, which was verified by the trial court. The State’s Additional Government Advocate admitted the compromise and raised no objection to quashing the proceedings. The Court noted that the Supreme Court has consistently held that criminal cases can be dismissed when the parties have settled their disputes. Applying this principle, the Court quashed the entire proceedings against the applicants and allowed the application.

Issues considered

  • Whether a criminal proceeding under the BNSS can be quashed on the basis of a compromise/settlement between the parties under Section 528.
  • Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order in such circumstances.

Legislation cited

  • BNSS — s. 115(2), 351(2), 352, 528, 85
  • DP Act — s. 3, 4

Subjects

  • settlement
  • compromise
  • quash of criminal proceedings
  • Section 528
  • BNSS
  • charge sheet
  • High Court

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

           APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40252 of 2026

Jitendra Kumar Verma And 3 Others
                                                              .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                  .....Opposite
                                                                        Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                         :    Pradeep Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                    :    G.A.

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

1. Heard Mr. Pradeep Kumar, 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 quash the charge sheet dated 01/11/2025 and
cognizance/summoning order dated 15/05/2026 filed in case no-8759/26
arising out of case crime no- 155/2025 under section 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2)
BNSS and 3/4 of DP Act P.S-Radhanagar District-Fatehpur, pending before
the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (C.A.W.), Fatehpur."

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.

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 :
                                                                                             NA528 No. 40252 of 2026
                                                                     2

                                    (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. Upon perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on
                                    the subject, this is a fit case for exercising powers of this Court to quash the
                                    proceedings, as prayed for by the applicants.

                                    8. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case, insofar as the present to the
                                    present applicants, are hereby quashed.

                                    9. The present application is allowed.



                                    September 29, 2026
                                    Vijay
                                                                                            (Chawan Prakash,J.)




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

Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.