Allahabad High Court
SNEHANSH UPADHYAYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The Court held that, given the parties’ settlement and the absence of any useful purpose in continuing the prosecution, the criminal proceedings under Section 305 BNSS may be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.
Summary
The applicant, Snehansh Upadhyay, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking to quash the criminal proceedings arising from FIR No.126 of 2024 and the charge‑sheet dated 30‑08‑2024 under Section 305 BNSS, as well as a summoning order dated 17‑02‑2025. The applicant and the second opposite party had amicably settled the dispute and the latter expressed no desire to continue prosecution. Both parties, including the State’s A.G., consented to the compromise. The Court referred to several Supreme Court decisions that permit compromise even in cognizable and non‑compoundable offences. Considering the settlement and the lack of any useful purpose in continuing the case, the Court quashed the charge‑sheet and the summons and allowed the application under Section 528.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between parties can be permitted to quash criminal proceedings in a case involving a cognizable, non‑compoundable offence under Section 305 BNSS.
- Whether the court may exercise its power under Section 528 BNSS to dismiss the charge‑sheet and summoning order upon the parties’ settlement.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. Act — s. 305, 528
Subjects
- compromise
- quash criminal proceedings
- Section 528 BNSS
- non‑compoundable offence
- settlement
- charge sheet
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 51112 of 2025
Snehansh Upadhyay
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhinav Singh, Santosh Kumar
Upadhyay
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Prateeyush Kumar Pathak
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard 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 entire
criminal proceeding as well as charge sheet dated 30.8.2024 arising out of
F.I.R. No.126 of 2024 under Section 305 B.N.S., Police Station Niwari,
District Rural (Commissionerate Ghaziabad) and also to quash the
summoning order dated 17.2.2025 pending in the Court of A.C.J. (J.D.),
Court No.5, Ghaziabad.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants 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 2.6.2025 passed
in Application U/S 528 BNSS No.15642 of 2025 directed the parties to
appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 19.6.2025 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,
NA528 No. 51112 of 2025
2
no fruitful purpose would be served if the 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 against the applicant and another accused.
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 charge sheet dated 30.8.2024 arising
out of F.I.R. No.126 of 2024 under Section 305 B.N.S., Police Station
Niwari, District Rural (Commissionerate Ghaziabad) and also to quash
the summoning order dated 17.2.2025 is hereby quashed against the
present applicant and another accused.
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…