Allahabad High Court
RAHUL SAXENA AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The High Court held that, in view of the parties' verified compromise and Supreme Court authority, the criminal proceedings were to be quashed as no useful purpose would be served by their continuation.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 24110 of 2024, which involved charges under Sections 498A, 323, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The case arose from Crime No. 663 of 2023 and was pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra. The parties had reached a compromise on 10 September 2025, which was verified by the trial court on 20 January 2026. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow compromise even in cognizable and non‑compoundable offences, the High Court held that continuing the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the court quashed the entire criminal proceedings and allowed the application under Section 528.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between the parties can be permitted to quash criminal proceedings involving cognizable and non‑compoundable offences under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.
- Whether the High Court may set aside the criminal case on the basis of a court‑verified compromise.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- criminal procedure
- Section 528
- quash of proceedings
- non‑compoundable offences
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- High Court
- Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42098 of 2025
Rahul Saxena And 4 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jigyasha Tripathi, Surendra Kumar
Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Deepak Kumar Patel, G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Mr. Surendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants,
learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed for
quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 24110 of 2024
(State Vs. Rahul Saxena and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 506
I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra, arising
out of Case Crime No. 663 of 2023, pending in the court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Agra on the basis of
compromise dated 10.09.2025.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and
opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court.
Applicants approached this Court by filing this application under Section
528 BNSS with prayer to quash the proceedings in terms of compromise
entered between the parties and this Court vide order dated 15.12.2025
directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the
parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated
20.01.2026 verified the parties as well as compromise application. He
further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled their
dispute through compromise and, as such, opposite party no.2 does not
wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party
no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of
the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is
NA528 No. 42098 of 2025
2
allowed to go on.
4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A.
submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court,
hence, no reason to proceed further.
5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs.
State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs.
State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab
(2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5
SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that
compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain
cognizable and non-compoundable offences. Reference may also be made
to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of
U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein
above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties,
this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be
served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.
7. Accordingly, entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 24110 of 2024
(State Vs. Rahul Saxena and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 506
I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra, arising
out of Case Crime No. 663 of 2023, pending in the court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Agra, are hereby
quashed in terms of compromise dated 10.09.2025.
8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 15, 2026
v.k. updh.
Digitally signed by :-
VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…