Allahabad High Court
MOHD TASLEEM AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
A criminal case may be quashed under Section 528 CrPC when the parties have settled their dispute by a valid compromise deed.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the chargesheet and cognizance order in a criminal case (State vs. Mohd Tasleem et al.) on the ground that they had entered into a compromise deed with the co‑defendants. Both the co‑defendants (opposite parties 2 and 3) admitted the compromise and raised no objection to the quash. The High Court examined the settled nature of the dispute and relied on a line of Supreme Court precedents that allow criminal proceedings to be dismissed where the parties have resolved their grievances. Applying that law, the Court held that the case was suitable for quashing and ordered the entire proceedings to be set aside. The application was allowed and the criminal case was quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding under Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506 IPC can be quashed on the basis of a compromise settlement between the parties.
- Whether Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers the court to quash such proceedings when a settlement is effected.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 324, 504, 506
Subjects
- quash of criminal proceedings
- compromise settlement
- Section 528 CrPC
- IPC offences
- High Court judgment
- settlement of dispute
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 49124 of 2025
Mohd Tasleem And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hasan Parvej
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Aman Kumar
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Mr. Hasan Parvej, learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr. Aman
Kumar, learned Counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3 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 this Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to allow this application and to quash the impugned
Chargesheet and cognizance order, dated 09.07.2022 & 24.06.2025 l.e.
annexure no.1 to the affidavit, and as well as entire proceeding of pending
case No. 1656 of 2025 (State vs Mohd Tasleem and others), under sections
323, 504, 506, 324 I.P.C., Police Station Bhojipura, District Bareilly,
arising out in case crime no.262 of 2022, in pursuance of the compromise
deed dated 27.11.2025 held between the parties, which is pending in the
learned court of A.C.J.M./ Additional Civil Judge(C.D.) First, Bareilly, U.P.,
otherwise applicant will suffer irreparable loss and injury."
3. Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants and
opposite party nos.2 and 3 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 counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3 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 in to
NA528 No. 49124 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 are hereby quashed.
9. The present application is allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
April 22, 2026
Vijay
Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…