Allahabad High Court
AMAN AZIM AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The Court held that, as the parties have settled the dispute and the compromise is verified, the criminal proceedings must be quashed.
Summary
The applicants Aman Azim and others filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order in a criminal case filed under sections 85, 115(2) of the B.N.S Act, the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019. They asserted that the dispute had been amicably settled by compromise, a fact verified by the trial court. The opposite party No.2 admitted the compromise and raised no objection to quashing. The High Court examined the settled law that criminal proceedings may be dismissed when parties have reached a settlement, citing several Supreme Court precedents. Finding the compromise genuine and verified, the Court exercised its power under Section 528 and quashed the entire proceedings against the applicants. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings under sections 85, 115(2) B.N.S, the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties under Section 528 CrPC.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- settlement
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528 CrPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act
- High Court
- criminal law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 52205 of 2025
Aman Azim And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gaurav Srivastav, Seemi Siddiqui
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Mukesh Ray, G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ankit Singh, learned Counsel holding brief of Mr. Gaurav
Srivastav, learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr. Mukesh Ray, learned
Counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State and
perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicants with the following prayer:
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the Charge
Sheet dated 24.05.2025 and Cognizance order dated 12.09.2025 as well
as entire proceedings of Case No. 54920 of 2025 (State Vs. Aman Azim
and others) u/s 85, 115 (2) BNS, section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and
Section 4 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019
against the applicant no. 1 and u/s 85, 115 (2) BNS and 3/4 Dowry
Prohibition Act against the opposite party no. 2 and 3, Police Station
Shahganj, District Agra arising out of Case Crime NO. 166 of 2025
pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 6, Agra."
3. Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants
and opposite party no.2 have compromised the dispute. It is further
argued that the said compromise has also been verified by the concerned
Trial Court, as such the proceedings against the applicants may be
quashed.
4. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 admitted the fact of
NA528 No. 52205 of 2025
2
compromise and stated that he has no objection if the proceeding of the
aforesaid case is quashed against the applicants.
5. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered
into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.
6. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement
arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of
(1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4
SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation :
(2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16
SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5)
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC
278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur
and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has
held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can
be quashed.
7. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court
on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising
powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the
applicants.
8. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case with regard to the present
applicants are hereby quashed.
9. The present application is allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 17, 2026
Vijay
Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…