NA528/14672/2026 of ANSHUL MALIK AND 2 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 16 September 2026

1. Heard Mr. Nipun Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Hemant Tyagi, learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr. Shashank Shekhar Misra, learned Counsel for opposite party no.2 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 this application and quash the impugned charge sheet dated 19.08.2023 and the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 13.08.2024 passed by the Ld. Civil Judge (S.D.) (F.T.C.), Gautam Buddha Nagar along with the impugned order dated 06.01.2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.) FTC II, Gautam Buddha Nagar in Case No. 8518/2024 (State v. Anshul Malik) arising out of Case Crime No.181 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, PS- Mahila Thana, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar and as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 8518/2024 (State v. Anshul Malik) arising out of Case Crime No.181 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, PS-Mahila Thana, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar pending in the court of the Ld. Civil Judge (S.D.) (F.T.C.), Gautam Buddha Nagar on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties on 17.12.2025."

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 counsel for opposite party no.2 admitted the fact of compromise and stated that he has no objection if the proceeding of the aforesaid case is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hemant Tyagi, Sumit Suri Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anshul Malik And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)

quashed against the applicants.

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. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicants.

8. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case with regard to the present applicants are hereby quashed.

9. The present application is allowed.

September 17, 2026 Vijay NA528 No. 14672 of 2026 2 (Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad