Allahabad High Court

CHANDRABHAN SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 24 March 2026
Bench: NAND PRABHA SHUKLA

Holding

The High Court declined to quash the criminal proceedings and directed the parties to obtain verification of the compromise by the trial court.

Summary

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet and criminal proceedings arising from offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and the Domestic Violence Protection Act, on the ground that the parties had amicably settled the dispute by a compromise dated 19‑12‑2025. The State opposed, contending that the trial court alone must verify the existence and terms of any compromise. The High Court, without expressing any view on the merits, directed the parties to appear before the trial court with the compromise deed for verification and ordered that no coercive action be taken pending such verification. The Court further indicated that after verification the parties could approach the High Court again for quashing the proceedings. The application was consequently disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether a compromise between the parties can be the basis for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 528 CrPC.
Whether the High Court can entertain a quash application without the trial court first verifying the compromise.
Whether the offences alleged (IPC §§498A, 323, 504, 506 and D.P. Act) are compoundable or can be extinguished by compromise.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
Domestic Violence Protection Act, 2005
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498A, 504, 506

Subjects

Section 528 CrPC
compromise
quash of criminal proceedings
verification of compromise
amicable settlement
abuse of process
criminal trial court

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9643 of 2026

Chandrabhan Sharma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Kumar, Virendra Kumar Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Mr. Rohit Kumar Pandey holding brief of Mr. Imtiaz Husain,
learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Pawan Kumar Shukla, learned
counsel for the opposite party No.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and
perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a
prayer to allow this application and quash the Charge sheet dated 28.11.2022
and including cognizance order dated 31.01.2023 as well as entire Criminal
proceedings in Criminal Case No.71377 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime
No.178 of 2022 under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and D.P. Act of
police station Mahila Thana District Ghaziabad pending in the Court of Civil
Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. Court No.1, Ghaziabad.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the parties have amicably
settled their disputes vide compromise dated 19.12.2025, which has been
placed as "Annexure No.-4" to the application and the opposite party No. 2
is residing at her matrimonial home. Therefore, no useful purpose would be
served in continuing the proceedings before the Court concerned and the
same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of process
of law.

4. Learned A.G.A., however, submits that it is the Trial Court, which has to
verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence
the applicants may approach the concerned Court and move an application
with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in
NA528 No. 9643 of 2026
2

accordance with law.

5. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, the applicants and opposite party No. 2 are directed to appear before
the Trial Court along with compromise deed as well certified copy of this
order within three weeks from today. It is expected that Court concerned
may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the
presence of the parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in
accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, after giving opportunity
of hearing to both the parties, preferably within a period of three months
from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no
other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying the compromise,
the Court concerned shall also record the statements of the parties as to
whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise
deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not.

6. The Court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of
the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to
approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

7. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court
concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the
aforesaid case.

8. With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of.

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
March 25, 2026
Aditya Tripathi

Digitally signed by :-
ADITYA TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…