Yogesh Chauhan and another v. State of U.P. and another), in that petition it was brought to the notice

2. Instant application under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the applicants with prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise of Criminal Case No.61042 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.217 of 2023, under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Trans Yamuna, District Agra.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants are accused in Criminal Case No.61042 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 217 of 2023, under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Trans Yamuna, District Agra. They had earlier filed an Application under Section 482 No.3903 of 2025 (Yogesh Chauhan and another Vs. State of U.P. and another), in that petition it was brought to the notice of the court that applicants and opposite parties have entered into compromise and the same has been submitted before the court of ACJM, Agra on 08.01.2025. This court on the request of the applicant disposed of the said application vide order dated 10.02.2025 with direction to the applicants to appear before the court below on 28.02.2025 alongwith his attested copy of the present petition. It was also directed the court below shall make endeavor to put to notice other parties and thereafter verify the compromise as alleged have been filed by the applicant by 25.04.2025.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants next submitted that in compliance of this order, the learned Magistrate concerned verified the said compromise in presence of the parties on 28.02.2025, and a copy of the order of the court has been filed as Annexure No.5 to the affidavit accompanying with application under Section 528 BNSS. Therefore, it is prayed that the proceedings of trial court may kindly be quashed in terms of said compromise. 2 NA528 No. 23606 of 2025

5. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court below.

6. The Hon'ble Apex Court after considering the various pronouncements including the judgments passed in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab [2012, 10 SCC 303], Narindra Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir vs. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641 and State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan, 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1799 in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688 observed as under:- "15. Considering the law on me point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under:

15.1. That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves:

15.2. Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;

15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that Capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender.

15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, off the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest, its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High 3 NA528 No. 23606 of 2025 Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;

15.5. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter compromise, etc.

7. In view of the above, the present application under Section 528 BNSS is allowed and consequently, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are hereby quashed.

8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the court concerned for necessary compliance. September 10, 2025 Ashish/- (Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.) ASHISH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Instant application under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the applicants with prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise of Criminal Case No.61042 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.217 of 2023, under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Trans Yamuna, District Agra.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants are accused in Criminal Case No.61042 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 217 of 2023, under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Trans Yamuna, District Agra. They had earlier filed an Application under Section 482 No.3903 of 2025 (Yogesh Chauhan and another Vs. State of U.P. and another), in that petition it was brought to the notice of the court that applicants and opposite parties have entered into compromise and the same has been submitted before the court of ACJM, Agra on 08.01.2025. This court on the request of the applicant disposed of the said application vide order dated 10.02.2025 with direction to the applicants to appear before the court below on 28.02.2025 alongwith his attested copy of the present petition. It was also directed the court below shall make endeavor to put to notice other parties and thereafter verify the compromise as alleged have been filed by the applicant by 25.04.2025.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants next submitted that in compliance of this order, the learned Magistrate concerned verified the said compromise in presence of the parties on 28.02.2025, and a copy of the order of the court has been filed as Annexure No.5 to the affidavit accompanying with application under Section 528 BNSS. Therefore, it is prayed that the proceedings of trial court may kindly be quashed in terms of said compromise. 2 NA528 No. 23606 of 2025

5. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court below.

6. The Hon'ble Apex Court after considering the various pronouncements including the judgments passed in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab [2012, 10 SCC 303], Narindra Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir vs. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641 and State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan, 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1799 in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688 observed as under:- "15. Considering the law on me point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under:

15.1. That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves:

15.2. Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;

15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that Capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender.

15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, off the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest, its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High 3 NA528 No. 23606 of 2025 Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;

15.5. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter compromise, etc.

7. In view of the above, the present application under Section 528 BNSS is allowed and consequently, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are hereby quashed.

8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the court concerned for necessary compliance. September 10, 2025 Ashish/- (Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.) ASHISH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad