Allahabad High Court

MUKESH AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 26 April 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The High Court held that the verified compromise is permissible and quashed the criminal proceedings.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 4352 of 2025) arising from Crime No. 589 of 2024, which involved several non‑compoundable offences. The parties had reached an out‑of‑court compromise, which was verified by the trial court on 28‑Nov‑2025. Both the applicants and the second opposite party consented to withdraw the prosecution, arguing that continuation would serve no useful purpose. The learned counsel relied on Supreme Court precedents that permit compromise even in cognizable and non‑compoundable offences. The High Court examined these authorities and the factual matrix, concluding that the compromise was valid and that the proceedings should be terminated. Accordingly, the Court quashed the entire criminal proceeding in terms of the compromise. The application under Section 528 was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether a compromise between parties can be permitted to quash criminal proceedings involving cognizable and non‑compoundable offences under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.
Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to quash the proceeding on the basis of a verified compromise.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 110, 115(2), 117(2), 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 352

Subjects

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

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 51759 of 2025

Mukesh And 6 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mayank Yadav, Saksham Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Yasharth Srivastava

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

1. Heard Sri Saksham Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri
Jyoti Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Yasharth
Srivastava, 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 proceeding of Case No. 4352 of 2025 (State Vs. Dr. Mahesh
and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 589 of 2024, under Sections
191(2), 191(3), 110, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 117(2) B.N.S., Police Station
Dibai, District Bulandshahr including charge sheet dated 20.12.2024 as well
as cognizance/summoning order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr, pending in the court of Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bulandshahr.

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 16.09.2025 directed the parties to
appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 28.11.2025 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, 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,
NA528 No. 51759 of 2025
2

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 proceeding of Case No. 4352 of 2025 (State Vs. Dr.
Mahesh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 589 of 2024, under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 110, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 117(2) B.N.S., Police
Station Dibai, District Bulandshahr including charge sheet dated 20.12.2024
as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr, pending in the court of Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr, are hereby quashed in terms of
compromise.

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

April 27, 2026
Rmk.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…