Allahabad High Court
NA528/8781/2026 of DEEPAK AND 4 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS on 6 October 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8781 of 2026 Court No. - 80 HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J. 1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam, learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr. Niyaj Ahamad, learned Counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3 and learned AGA for the State and perused the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8781 of 2026
Court No. - 80
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
5
Decisions referred to
In this index
5
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam, learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr. Niyaj Ahamad, learned Counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3 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 quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 691 of 2019 (State vs. Deepak and others), Charge Sheet dated 15.07.2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 549 of 2018, under Section 498A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mawana, District Meerut as well as and cognizance/summoning order dated 09.09.2019, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Mawana, District Meerut in the light of compromise dated 09.02.2026 made between the parties."
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 A.G.A. admitted the fact of compromise and stated that he has no objection if the proceeding of the aforesaid case are quashed against the applicants. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Niyaj Ahamad Deepak And 4 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
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. Upon perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject, this is a fit case for exercising powers of this Court to quash the proceedings, as prayed for by the applicants.
8. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case, insofar as the present to the present applicants, are hereby quashed.
9. The present application is allowed.
October 7, 2026 Vijay NA528 No. 8781 of 2026 2 (Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad