Allahabad High Court
SHARAD RAI ALIAS SHARAD KUMAR SINGH RAI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The High Court held that, despite the cognizable and non‑compoundable nature of the offences, the verified compromise justified quashing the criminal proceedings under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 10641 of 2022) arising from offences under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC. Both parties claimed they had settled the dispute out of court and the opposite party was ready to withdraw the prosecution. The High Court examined precedent that the Supreme Court permits compromise even for certain cognizable and non‑compoundable offences. Relying on those decisions and noting that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial, the Court verified the compromise and ordered the entire criminal proceedings to be quashed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Can a compromise between parties lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings involving cognizable and non‑compoundable offences under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC?
- Does Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. empower the High Court to quash such proceedings on the basis of a court‑verified compromise?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- criminal procedure
- Section 528
- non‑compoundable offences
- quash of proceedings
- IPC 323
- IPC 504
- IPC 506
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 48420 of 2025
Sharad Rai Alias Sharad Kumar Singh Rai And 2
Others .....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Keshari Nandan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Arun Kumar Singh, G.A.
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Sri Keshari Nandan Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri
Kamal Dev Rai, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Arun Kumar
Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the
record.
2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed to
quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10641 of 2022 (State
of U.P. Vs. Sharad Kumar Singh Rai and others), arising out of Case
Crime No. 807 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police
Station Lanka, District Varanasi, pending in the court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Varanasi, on the basis of
compromise dated 19.11.2025.
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 528
BNSS with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise
entered between the parties and this Court vide order dated 18.12.2025
directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the
parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated
05.02.2026 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 applicants and opposite
party no.2 have settled their dispute through compromise and, as such,
NA528 No. 48420 of 2025
2
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 allowed to go on.
4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as 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, entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10641 of 2022
(State of U.P. Vs. Sharad Kumar Singh Rai and others), arising out of
Case Crime No. 807 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police
Station Lanka, District Varanasi, pending in the court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Varanasi, are hereby quashed in
terms of compromise dated 19.11.2025.
8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
April 27, 2026
Rmk.
Digitally signed by :-
RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…