Allahabad High Court

TEJPAL AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The court held that where a valid compromise between the parties is established and verified, the criminal proceedings may be quashed.

Summary

The applicants Tejpal and three others filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a summons and the entire criminal proceedings (S.T. No. 378 of 2024) arising from Crime No. 175 of 2022, which involved offences under IPC sections 308, 325, 323, 504 and 506. The applicants asserted that they had reached a compromise with the opposite parties 2 and 3, a settlement that was verified by the trial court. The opposite parties admitted the compromise and raised no objection to the quashing of the case. The High Court, relying on a line of Supreme Court decisions that allow dismissal of criminal cases where the parties have settled their dispute, held that the proceedings could be set aside. Consequently, the court quashed the entire proceedings and allowed the application.

Issues considered

Whether criminal proceedings under Sections 308, 325, 323, 504 and 506 IPC can be quashed on the basis of a compromise/settlement between the parties under Section 528 BNSS.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 308, 323, 325, 504, 506

Subjects

settlement
compromise
quash of criminal proceedings
Section 528
Indian Penal Code
Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41601 of 2025

Tejpal And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Utkarsha Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Kinshuk Shukla

Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Heard Mr. Utkarsha Shukla, learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr.
Kinshuk Shukla, learned Counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3 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 prayer to quash the summoning/cognizance order dated
20.09.2023 as well as entire proceedings of S.T. no. 378 of 2024, State v.
Tejpal and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 175 of 2022, under
Sections 308, 325, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Aliganj, District
Bareilly, pending before the Court of Additional District Judge/FTC-I,
Bareilly.
3. Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants and
opposite party nos. 2 and 3 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 counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3 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
NA528 No. 41601 of 2025
2

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 are hereby quashed.
9. The present application is allowed.
May 6, 2026
Vijay
(Chawan Prakash,J.)

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…