NA528/44220/2025 of RAMBABU PAL AND 2 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 44220 of 2025 Court No. - 79 HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J. 1. Heard Mr. Amlesh Kumar Yadav, learned Counsel holding brief of Mr. Sanjai Kumar Pandey , learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr.  Jagannath Gupta, 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 under section 528 of BNSS and the entire criminal proceeding in Case No. 4047/2024 (State Vs. Rambabu Pal And others) Pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court no. 8, Prayagraj, arising out of Case Crime no. 310/2021 under section 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C Police station Handia, District Prayagraj, against the applicants is summoned under section 323, 504, 506 of IPC, whereby the learned court below summoned the applicants to face the trial in pursuance of summoning order dated 02.04.2025." 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 quashed against the applicants. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aditya Pratap Singh, Piyush Kumar Pandey, Sanjai Kumar Pandey, Vinay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jagannath Gupta Rambabu Pal And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered in to 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 are hereby quashed. 9. The present application is allowed. April 20, 2026 Vijay NA528 No. 44220 of 2025 2 (Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad