Allahabad High Court
JAHID AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The court held that, given the verified compromise and lack of any useful purpose, the criminal proceedings were quashed under the inherent jurisdiction of Section 528.
Summary
The applicants, Jahid and eight others, were charged in Criminal Case No.25855 of 2022 for offences including rioting, assault and criminal intimidation. They filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quash of the charge sheet dated 28‑08‑2022 and the cognizance order dated 01‑11‑2022, alleging an out‑of‑court compromise with the second opposite party. The trial court verified the parties and the compromise, and both sides confirmed that the prosecution should be withdrawn. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow compromise even for cognizable and non‑compoundable offences, the High Court held that continuing the proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, the court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 and quashed the charge sheet, cognizance order and the entire criminal proceeding.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between the parties can be the basis for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- Whether Section 528 can be invoked to quash proceedings involving cognizable and non‑compoundable offences listed in the charge sheet.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 308, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528
- non‑compoundable offences
- inherent jurisdiction
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 45335 of 2025
Jahid And 8 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Kr. Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Sri Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, learned counsel for applicants and
learned AGA for the State.
2. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court
under Section 528 BNSS to quash the impugned charge sheet dated
28.8.2022 along with cognizance order dated 1.11.2022 as well as entire
proceeding of Crl. Case No.25855 of 2022 (State Vs. Jahid and others),
arising out of Case Crime No.201 of 2022, under Sections 147, 149, 323,
324, 504, 506, 325 308 I.P.C., P.S. Kithore, District Meerut.
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 Application 528 BNSS
No.15732 of 2025 with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of
compromise entered between the parties, this Court vide order dated
4.6.2025 directed the parties to appear before the trial court for
verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide
order dated 2.8.2025 verified the parties as well as compromise
application. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2
compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to
proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that
applicant and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their
dispute 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. 45335 of 2025
2
allowed to go on.
4. Learned AGA 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, the proceedings of charge sheet dated 28.8.2022 along
with cognizance order dated 1.11.2022 as well as entire proceeding of Crl.
Case No.25855 of 2022 (State Vs. Jahid and others), arising out of Case
Crime No.201 of 2022, under Sections 147, 149, 323, 324, 504, 506, 325
308 I.P.C., P.S. Kithore, District Meerut is hereby quashed.
8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
May 5, 2026
Md Faisal
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…