Allahabad High Court

RIHAN AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 21 April 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The Court held that where the parties have settled their dispute and there is no useful purpose in continuing prosecution, the proceedings may be quashed even for cognizable, non‑compoundable offences.

Summary

The applicants, Rihan and two others, filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash the charge sheet and subsequent criminal proceedings arising from offences under Sections 323, 352, 504, 5506 and 308 IPC. The parties claimed they had amicably settled the dispute, and the second opposite party, a victim, consented to withdraw the prosecution. The High Court examined precedent that permits compromise even for cognizable, non‑compoundable offences, citing several Supreme Court decisions. After verifying the compromise, the Court held that continuing the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the charge sheet, cognizance order and the entire trial were quashed, and the application was allowed.

Issues considered

Can a compromise between the parties lead to the quash of criminal proceedings for cognizable, non‑compoundable offences under Sections 323, 352, 504, 5506 and 308 IPC?
Whether the High Court may exercise its power under Section 528 CrPC to dismiss the charge sheet and proceedings after verification of the compromise.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528

Subjects

compromise
quash of criminal proceedings
Section 528 CrPC
non‑compoundable offences
settlement
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 49347 of 2025

Rihan And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Krishna Madhaw Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Zafar Ahmad Khan, G.A.

Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Krishna Madhaw Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants,
Sri Zafar Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, and
learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. The present 528 BNSS application has been filed to quash the
impugned charge sheet No.137 of 2018 dated 26.8.2018 and
cognizance/summoning order dated 4.12.2019 passed by Additional
District Judge Court No.14, Moradabad as well as entire proceeding of
Session Trial No.1361 of 2021 (State vs. Rihan and others) arising out of
Case Crime No.183 of 2018, under Sections 323, 352, 504, 5506, 308
I.P.C., Police Station Mainather, District Moradabad.

4. 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 Hon'ble Court by filing this 528 BNSS
application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise
entered between the parties, this Court vide order dated 7.1.2026 directed
the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the parties
and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 19.2.2026
verified the parties as well as compromise application. He further
submitted that applicant 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
NA528 No. 49347 of 2025
2

have settled through compromise their dispute and as such opposite party
no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicant.
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.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute
the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the
applicant or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He
submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in
the aforesaid case are quashed.

6. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute
out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. Accordingly, the proceedings of charge sheet No.137 of 2018 dated
26.8.2018 and cognizance/summoning order dated 4.12.2019 passed by
Additional District Judge Court No.14, Moradabad as well as entire
proceeding of Session Trial No.1361 of 2021 (State vs. Rihan and others)
arising out of Case Crime No.183 of 2018, under Sections 323, 352, 504,
5506, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Mainather, District Moradabad is hereby
NA528 No. 49347 of 2025
3

quashed.

10. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.

(Chawan Prakash,J.)
April 22, 2026
Md Faisal

Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…