Allahabad High Court
OMVEER AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
Where the parties have reached a verified compromise, the criminal proceedings may be quashed under the principles laid down by the Supreme Court.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Code seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 34072 of 2024) arising from allegations under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. They asserted that the dispute had been amicably settled and that the compromise was verified by the trial court. The State’s Additional Government Advocate admitted the compromise and raised no objection to quashing. Relying on a line of Supreme Court decisions that allow dismissal of criminal cases where the parties have settled, the High Court held that the proceedings could be terminated. Consequently, the court quashed the entire criminal proceeding against the applicants and allowed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding under IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties under Section 528 of the Code.
- Whether the existence of a verified settlement suffices to extinguish the liability for offences such as cruelty, assault, criminal intimidation and dowry harassment.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Hindu Marriage Act — s. 13B
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 504, 506
Subjects
- quash of criminal case
- settlement/compromise
- Section 528 application
- IPC offences
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Supreme Court precedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42613 of 2025
Omveer And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nitin Pal, Shivam Kumar Pal, Shobhit
Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Mr. Shivam Kumar Pal, learned Counsel for the applicantsb 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 the Hon'ble court may graciously be
pleased to the quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 34072 of 2024 (State Vs.
Omveer and others) under Section 498A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of
D.P. Act, Police Station-Mahuwa Kheda, District-Aligarh and impugned summoning
order dated 29.08.2024 as well as Charge Sheet No.33 of 2024 dated 10.02.2024
arising out of Case Crime No.83 of 2022, under Section 498A, 323, 504 and 506
I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Mahuwa Kheda, District-Aligarh
pending in the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-II, Aligarh in
term of the compromise-Matrimonial Divorce Petition No.645 of 2025 (Omveer Vs.
Smt. Sheetal Jadaun), under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act pending before the
chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh, filed by the parties."
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
NA528 No. 42613 of 2025
2
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.
September 21, 2026
Vijay
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…