Sharad Kumar Patel and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 27184 of 2025

Sharad Kumar Patel And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Srivastava, Durga Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ranvijay, G.A. Court No. - 74

¶3

HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶5

The present 528 BNSS application has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 17.10.2010 as well as the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 504 of 2011 (State Vs. Phoolchand and Others) for the offences under sections 143, 504, 506 1.P.C. and 3(1)X SC/ST Act, arising out of case crime no. 113 of 2010, Police Station Ramnagar, District Varanasi.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that in pursuance of FIR, I.O. has submitted charge sheet against six accused persons and during pendency of petition, two named accused, namely, Phoolchandra and Mangru have died. 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 BNSS application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 30.07.2025 sent the matter to trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application and directed to deposit the money/compensation amount. Trial court

¶7

NA528 No. 27184 of 2025

¶8

2

¶9

vide order dated 12.08.2025 verified the parties through their counsel as well as compromise application, the same has been sent through letter dated 09.10.2025, and also verified that victim/opposite party No.2 returned the compensation amount of Rs.6,250/- through Challan No.IG26331 on 16.09.2025. 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 private and civil 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.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

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 non-compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the 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.

¶13

NA528 No. 27184 of 2025

¶14

3

¶15

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.

¶16

Accordingly, the impugned entire proceedings of S.T. No. 504 of 2011, under sections 143, 504, 506 1.P.C. and 3(1)X SC/ST Act, arising out of case crime no. 113 of 2010, Police Station Ramnagar, District Varanasi, is hereby quashed .

¶17

This application under Section 528 BNSS is accordingly allowed .

¶18

October 29, 2025

¶19

Nitin Verma

¶20

(Deepak Verma,J.)

¶21

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sharad Kumar Patel and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharad Kumar Patel and 3 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