Allahabad High Court
IQBAL AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The High Court quashed the entire criminal proceeding under Section 528 CrPC, holding that the compromise between the parties justified termination of the case.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash Criminal Case No.21 of 2017 (State vs. Iqbal and others), which involved offences under Sections 406, 452, 504 and 506 of the IPC. The parties had already reached a compromise, which was verified by the Judicial Magistrate on 27‑02‑2026 and acknowledged by the opposing party’s counsel. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow quashing of criminal proceedings when a genuine settlement exists even for non‑compoundable offences, the High Court examined whether the dispute’s resolution justified termination of the case. The Court held that continuing the prosecution would be futile and contrary to the ends of justice. Consequently, the entire criminal proceeding was quashed and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Can criminal proceedings for non‑compoundable offences under the IPC be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties?
- Does Section 528 CrPC empower the High Court to terminate such proceedings when a genuine settlement is proved?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 452, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528 CrPC
- non‑compoundable offences
- IPC Sections 406,452,504,506
- settlement
- judicial discretion
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40685 of 2025
Iqbal And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vijendra Pal
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA.
2. The present application has been filed to quash entire proceedings of
Criminal Case No.21 of 2017 (State Vs. Iqbal and others), arising out of
Case Crime No.241 of 2016, under Sections 406, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.
Nawabganj, District Bareilly, pending in the court of learned Judicial
Magistrate-, Nawabganj, Bareilly, on the basis of compromise.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants has submitted that
compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified
by learned court concerned on dated 27.02.2026 which has been appended
with this petition, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by
learned AGA.
4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise
has been confirmed and admitted by learned AGA and as such, there would
be no harm and error if the proceedings may be quashed in light of the
compromise.
5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of
Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 54 of the said
judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having
regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has
been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its
opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility
and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to
an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate
guiding factor.
NA528 No. 40685 of 2025
2
6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao
Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has
also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial,
family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature"
and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of
disputes between the parties.
7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case,
entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.21 of 2017 (State Vs. Iqbal and
others), arising out of Case Crime No.241 of 2016, under Sections 406, 452,
504, 506 IPC, P.S. Nawabganj, District Bareilly, pending in the court of
learned Judicial Magistrate-, Nawabganj, Bareilly, are hereby quashed.
8. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed.
9. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that she has been duped or betrayed,
then in that event, she may seek recall of this order by way of filing recall
application explaining the reasons.
March 19, 2026
Vivek Kr.
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIVEK KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…