Allahabad High Court
NARESH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The court held that, on account of the verified compromise, the criminal proceedings should be quashed as they serve no useful purpose.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash charge sheet No. 29/2025 and related proceedings in a dowry‑related case. They claimed that the dispute with the second opposite party had been amicably settled and that the latter wished to withdraw the prosecution. Both parties' counsel agreed to the compromise, and the trial court verified the compromise application. Citing Supreme Court precedents allowing compromise even in cognizable and non‑compoundable offences, the High Court held that continuing the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the court quashed the charge sheet, the summoning order, and the entire proceeding, and allowed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether a compromise between the accused and a complainant can be the basis for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.
- Whether offences under IPC sections 85, 115(2), 352 and the Dowry Prohibition Act (sections 3 and 4) are amenable to compromise and consequent dismissal of the case
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 528
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 352, 85
Subjects
- compromise
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 528
- dowry death
- non‑compoundable offences
- High Court
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7403 of 2026
Naresh And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Haridwar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Haridwar
Singh, learned counsel for applicants 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 No. 29/2025 dated
28.04.2025 along with summoning order dated 09.12.2025 passed by
learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T. Court no.1, Agra as well as
entire proceeding of Case No. 23042 of 2025 (State Vs. Ravi and others)
arising out of Case Crime No. 37 of 2025, U/s 85, 115(2), 352 B.N.S. and
3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District Agra.
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 20.3.2026 directed the parties to
appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 17.4.2026 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
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
NA528 No. 7403 of 2026
2
compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is
allowed to go on.
4. Learned AGA 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 he has no objection, if the
proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
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, the proceedings of charge sheet No. 29/2025 dated
28.04.2025 along with summoning order dated 09.12.2025 passed by
learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T. Court no.1, Agra as well as
entire proceeding of Case No. 23042 of 2025 (State Vs. Ravi and others)
arising out of Case Crime No. 37 of 2025, U/s 85, 115(2), 352 B.N.S. and
3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District Agra
are hereby quashed.
8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 8, 2026
Md Faisal
Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…