Allahabad High Court
SUBHAN AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The court held that where parties have settled their dispute and the compromise is verified, the criminal proceedings may be quashed.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the charge sheet and related criminal proceedings arising from a case in which they were charged under various IPC sections and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The parties had reached a compromise on 5 January 2026, which was verified by the trial court, and the opposite party’s counsel admitted the settlement and raised no objection to quashing. The court noted that settled criminal matters may be dismissed, citing several Supreme Court decisions that endorse quashing where the dispute is amicably resolved. Applying this principle, the court held that the compromise justified the dismissal of the pending criminal case. Consequently, the entire proceedings against the applicants were quashed and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties under Section 528 BNSS.
- Whether the settlement of disputes under the cited IPC sections and the Dowry Prohibition Act warrants dismissal of the charge sheet.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 354, 498-A, 504, 506
Subjects
- settlement
- quash of criminal proceedings
- compromise
- Section 528
- Indian Penal Code
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7293 of 2026
Subhan And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Zafeer Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Hemant Kumar
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Ms. Vandana Verma, learned Counsel holding brief of Mr.
Safeer Ahmad, learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr. Hemant Kumar,
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:
"Court It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court
may be pleased to allow the present application and quash the charge
sheet по. 170 of 2023 dated 12.12.2023 and cognizance order dated
19.6.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.2,
Moradabad and also entire proceedings of Case No. 30514 of 2024 (State
Vs. Subhan and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 179 of 2023
summoned the applicant nos.1 to 3 under section 498-A, 323, 504, 506
I.P.C. and section 3/4 D.P. Act and summoned the applicant no.4 under
section 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Galshaheed,
District Moradabad in the light of compromise dated 5.1.2026 pending in
the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2
Moradabad."
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
NA528 No. 7293 of 2026
2
quashed.
4. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 admitted the fact of
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…