Allahabad High Court
PRASHANT SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMIT GOPAL
Holding
The Court held that a criminal proceeding may be quashed under Section 528 CrPC when the parties have settled their dispute and agreed to withdraw the case, in line with Supreme Court authority.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet dated 21‑10‑2024 and the cognizance order dated 06‑12‑2024 in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 498‑A, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Delhi Police Act. The matter was referred to the Court’s Mediation Centre, where the parties reached an amicable settlement and agreed to withdraw the pending criminal proceedings. The State raised no objection to the settlement. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow quashing of criminal proceedings when the parties have settled their grievances, the High Court allowed the application and quashed the charge sheet and cognizance order. The decision underscores the Court’s power to dismiss criminal cases on the basis of a lawful settlement between the parties.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding can be quashed under Section 528 CrPC on the basis of a settlement and withdrawal of the case by the parties.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Delhi Police Act — s. 3, 4
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 13-B
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 406, 498-A, 504, 506
Subjects
- quash criminal proceeding
- settlement
- mediation
- Section 528 CrPC
- criminal procedure
- IPC offences
- Hindu Marriage Act
- court discretion
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4480 of 2025
Prashant Singh And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashish Srivastava, Atul Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dharmendra Pratap Singh Chauhan,
G.A.
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Ashish Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri
Devendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the State and perused the
records.
3. Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2 is not present even in the revised call.
4. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicants Prashant Singh, Nirmala Singh and Shiv Mangal Singh
, with the prayers to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 21.10.2024
and cognizance/summoning order dated 06.12.2024 in Case No. 1177 of
2024 (State Vs. Nirmala Singh and others) in Case Crime No. 616/2024,
under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police
Station Chakeri, East (Commissionerate Kanpur Nagar), District Kanpur
Nagar and with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of
aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application.
5. The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide
order dated 03.04.2025 for making an effort between the parties for
settling their disputes amicably.
6. As per report of Mediation Centre dated 20.09.2025 the parties have
amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases
going on between them in view of interim settlement agreement dated
30.08.2025.
7. As per the office report dated 24.11.2025, a report from the Mediation
Centre of this Court is on record.
8. From perusal of the report of Mediation Centre of this Court, it appears
NA528 No. 4480 of 2025
2
that in pursuance of the said order the mediation proceedings were taken
up which ended in a settlement dated 20.09.2025 between the parties and
the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and
even the dispute arising in the present matter. The parties have agreed to
withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in
para 7(f) of the said mediation report.
9. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that under Section 13-B of
the Hindu Marriage Act has been decided by the Family Court
concerned.
10. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the said proposition.
11. 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.
12. 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
applicant(s).
13. The present application is allowed.
14. The impugned charge sheet dated 21.10.2024 and
cognizance/summoning order dated 06.12.2024 passed in the aforesaid
case are hereby quashed.
(Samit Gopal,J.)
May 7, 2026
M. ARIF
Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…