Allahabad High Court
NA528/34919/2026 of ANURAG SHARMA AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 27 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34919 of 2026 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J. 1. Heard Ms. Priya Maddhesiya, learned Counsel holding brief of Ms. Preete Chaudhary, learned Counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State and perused the records. 2. The
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34919 of 2026
Court No. - 83
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 Ms. Priya Maddhesiya, learned Counsel holding brief of Ms. Preete Chaudhary, 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 application and to quash the entire proceeding/charge sheet dated 22.12.2021 on the basis of compromise entered between the parties dated 20.05.2026, the Warrant Trial No. 1670 of 2022 (State Versus Anurag and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 0309 of 2021 under section 498A, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, 1961, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District Mathura, as well as Cognizance order dated 18.02.2022 in the Warrant Trial No. 1670 of 2022 (State Versus Anurag and another), pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fast Track Court, (Crime Against Women), Judicial Magistrate, Mathura."
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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Preete Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anurag Sharma And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
applicants.
5. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case, insofar as the present to the present applicants, are hereby quashed.
8. The present application is allowed.
September 28, 2026 Vijay NA528 No. 34919 of 2026 2 (Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad