Nadeem and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142283

Court No. - 72

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 12265 of 2025

Applicant :- Nadeem And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Manoj Pandey,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit annexing with compromise verification report, filed by learned counsel for the applicants, today in the Court, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 application, has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 13.04.2024, cognizance order dated 23.04.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 14775 of 2024 (State Vs. Nadeem and Others) under Sections 323, 504, 506, 420, 354, 354-D, 465 I.P.C. arising out of Case Crime No. 07 of 2024, Police Station-Pakbada, District Moradabad pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Moradabad.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicant approached this Hon'ble Court by filing this 528 B.N.S.S. application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 15.04.2025 sent the matter to trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. The order dated 15.04.2025 is quoted below:-

¶10

"Sri Manoj Pandey, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2, which is taken on record.

¶11

Learned counsel for both the parties submitted that parties settled their dispute arising out of offence punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506, 420, 354, 354-D, 465 of I.P.C. on the basis of compromise dated 22.01.2025. A certified copy of the said compromise is on record which is annexed as Annexure No. 6 of the affidavit.

¶12

Both the parties are directed to appear before the court concerned within six weeks from today for verification and the court concerned is directed to verify the same.

¶13

Applicants are directed to file supplementary affidavit annexing certified copy of the compromise as well as verification proceedings of compromise.

¶14

Put up this case as fresh on 20.08.2025

¶15

Till the next date of listing proceedings of Case No. 14775 of 2024 (State Vs. Nadeem & Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 07 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 420, 354, 354-D, 465 of I.P.C., Police Station- Pakbada, District Moradabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Moradabad shall remain stayed against the applicants."

¶16

Pursuant to the said order dated 15.04.2025, the parties appeared before the court below through their respective counsels and in their presence, after due verification of the contents of the compromise made between the parties, order has been passed by the court verifying the said compromise. A copy of the same is annexed as Annexure-SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit.

¶17

He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶19

Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

¶20

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and noncompoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the

¶21

decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.

¶23

Accordingly, the charge-sheet dated 13.04.2024, cognizance order dated 23.04.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 14775 of 2024 (State Vs. Nadeem and Others) under Sections 323, 504, 506, 420, 354, 354-D, 465 I.P.C. arising out of Case Crime No. 07 of 2024, Police Station-Pakbada, District Moradabad, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Moradabad, is hereby quashed.

¶24

This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed .

¶25

Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Vibha Singh

¶26

Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nadeem and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nadeem and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Tasleem and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Prakash Saini vs State of U.P. and Another

Ghanshyam Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunita Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another

Suraj Mal and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek and 11 Others vs State of U.P. and Another