Allahabad High Court
PRABHANSH @ PARAMHANSH SINGH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The court held that where parties have settled and there is no public interest, the criminal proceedings may be quashed under Section 528 CrPC even for cognizable and non‑compoundable offences.
Summary
The applicants filed a Section 528 CrPC application to quash criminal case ST No.491/2008 (State v. Paramhansh Singh) involving offences under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 and 308 IPC. The parties had amicably settled the dispute and the trial court verified the compromise. Both the applicant and the opposite party No.2, as well as the State’s AGA, consented to the withdrawal of the prosecution. The High Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents that permit compromise even for cognizable and non‑compoundable offences where public interest is absent, held that continuing the trial would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the court quashed the criminal proceedings and allowed the Section 528 application.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between parties can be permitted to quash criminal proceedings under Section 528 CrPC for cognizable and non‑compoundable offences.
- Whether the court may dismiss the case after verification of the compromise and consent of the State.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 308, 323, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- section 528
- quash criminal proceedings
- non‑compoundable offences
- settlement
- Allahabad High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 50890 of 2025
Prabhansh @ Paramhansh Singh And 4 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Narendra Nath Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ram Dulare Chauhan, G.A., Nainshi
Srivastava
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Sri Narendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants,
learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the
State.
2. The present 528 BNSS application has been filed to quash the S.T.
No.491/2008 (State Vs. Paramhansh Singh) arising out of Case Crime
No.400/2005 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., Police
Station Nebuwa, District Kushi Nagar pending before 2nd
F.T.C./Additional District Judge, Kushi Nagar at Padrauna.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicants and
opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court.
Applicant 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 9.1.2026 directed
the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the parties
and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 1.4.2026
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
applicant. 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 applicant.
Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicant
and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the
NA528 No. 50890 of 2025
2
prosecution is allowed to go on.
4. 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.
5. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute
out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Accordingly, the proceedings of S.T. No.491/2008 (State Vs.
Paramhansh Singh) arising out of Case Crime No.400/2005 under
Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Nebuwa,
District Kushi Nagar pending before 2nd F.T.C./Additional District
Judge, Kushi Nagar at Padrauna is hereby quashed.
9. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
April 20, 2026
Md Faisal
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…