Allahabad High Court
KAPIL KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The High Court held that where parties have settled and no useful purpose is served by continuing, the criminal proceedings, including the charge sheet and cognizance order, may be quashed even for non‑compoundable offences.
Summary
The applicants, Kapil Kumar and another, were charged under Sections 498A, 452, 323, 504 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in a case pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC1, Ghaziabad. The parties reached an out‑of‑court settlement, which was verified by the trial court on 6‑April‑2026. Both the applicants and the second opposite party consented to withdraw the prosecution, and the State had no objection. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow compromise even in certain cognizable and non‑compoundable offences, the High Court held that continuing the proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the charge sheet dated 17‑Oct‑2021, the cognizance order dated 24‑May‑2022, and the entire criminal proceeding were quashed. The application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between parties can justify quashing of criminal proceedings in cognizable, non‑compoundable offences under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.
- Whether the court may set aside a charge sheet and cognizance order on the basis of an out‑of‑court settlement.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 452, 498A, 504
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- non‑compoundable offences
- Section 528 B.N.S.S.
- IPC 498A
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- settlement
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 52193 of 2025
Kapil Kumar And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Yogesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Praveen Mishra
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Mishra learned counsel for applicants, Sri
Dheeraj Kumar Mauraya, Advocate holding brief of Sri Praveen Mishra,
learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and learned AGA for the State.
2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by
the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 17.10.2021
and cognizance order dated 24.05.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge
(J.D.)/ F.T.C.1 (Crimes Against Women), Ghaziabad as well as entire
proceeding of Case No. 60931 of 2022 (State Vs. Kapil and others)
arising out of Case Crime No. 0136 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 452,
323, 504 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District-
Ghaziabad, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/ F.T.C.1
(Crimes Against Women), Ghaziabad.
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 with prayer to
quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the
parties, this Court vide order dated 16.3.2026 directed the parties to
appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 6.4.2026 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 through
NA528 No. 52193 of 2025
2
compromise their dispute 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, 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
applicants 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 charge sheet dated 17.10.2021 and cognizance order
dated 24.05.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/ F.T.C.1 (Crimes
Against Women), Ghaziabad as well as entire proceeding of Case No.
60931 of 2022 (State Vs. Kapil and others) arising out of Case Crime No.
0136 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 452, 323, 504 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act,
Police Station Mahila Thana, District-Ghaziabad are hereby quashed.
NA528 No. 52193 of 2025
3
9. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 17, 2026
Md Faisal
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…