Allahabad High Court
NA528/42813/2026 of SMT. MARIYAM AND 3 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 4 October 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42813 of 2026 Court No. - 80 HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J. 1. Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned Counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State and perused the records. 2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42813 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. Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned Counsel for the applicants 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 allow the present Criminal Misc. Application and to quash/set aside the entire proceedings of Case No.683/2019 (State Vs. Mariyam & others), arising out of Case Crime No.453/2018, under sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 Police Station Ganj, District Rampur pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rampur and also to quash the impugned charge sheet No.429/2018 dated 27.11.2018 submitted in the aforesaid case & the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 26.03.2019passed by the learned Trial Court in terms of compromise arrived between the parties dated 31.01.2025 which has been verified by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 31.07.2026."
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 is quashed against the applicants.
5. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered into Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rakesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Mariyam And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
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 5, 2026 Vijay NA528 No. 42813 of 2026 2 (Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad