Allowed¶20

Subhash Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Aug 2025NA528/27956/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of criminal proceedings on amicable settlement/matrimonial reunion; Section 528 BNSS; Sections 498-A, 323, 494 IPC and Section 3/4 DP Act; Case Crime No. 195 of 2024, P.S. Gunnaur, District Sambhal; mediation compromise dated 21.09.2025; relied on B.S. Joshi (2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303, Shaifullah 2013 (83) ACC 278, Parbatbhai Ahir (2017) 9 SCC 641; summoning order dated 08.04.2025 and charge sheet dated 06.08.2024 quashed; Allahabad High Court; Tej Pratap Tiwari, J.; December 10, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the charge sheet dated 06.08.2024, the cognizance/summoning order dated 08.04.2025 and the entire proceedings of Case No. 854 of 2025 (State vs. Subhash) pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, District Sambhal.

Subhash Chandra vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet dated 06.08.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 08.04.2025 and the criminal proceedings against the applicant in Case No. 854 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 195 of 2024) should be quashed on account of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties through mediation.

¶12

Court's answer

Where the parties have amicably settled their dispute through the Mediation Centre of the Court and decided to reunite and to withdraw the cases going on between them, it is open to this Court to exercise its powers to quash the proceedings/summoning order/charge sheet.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The law relating to quashing of a criminal case on the basis of a settlement arrived at between the parties is well settled, as enunciated by the Apex Court in the decisions relied upon.

¶17

Key takeaways

The application is allowed and the impugned summoning order dated 08.04.2025, the charge sheet and the entire proceedings of Case No. 854 of 2025 are quashed.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Tej Pratap Tiwari, J.) — Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 27956 of 2025 filed by Subhash Chandra allowed. Prayer was to quash the charge sheet dated 06.08.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 08.04.2025 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, District Sambhal and the entire proceedings of Case No. 854 of 2025 (State vs. Subhash), arising out of Case Crime No. 195 of 2024 under Sections 498-A, 323, 494 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act. On referral (order dated 04.08.2025), the Mediation Centre reported success by settlement dated 21.09.2025: the applicant-husband and opposite party no. 2-wife agreed to reunite and to withdraw the inter-se cases; State counsel did not dispute the compromise. Reliance placed on settled Apex Court law (B.S. Joshi; Nikhil Merchant; Manoj Sharma; Gian Singh; Shaifullah; Parbatbhai Ahir) that cases settled between parties can be quashed. Summoning order, charge sheet and proceedings quashed. Decided December 10, 2025.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 27956 of 2025

¶3

Subhash Chandra

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Ashok Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.
Court No.- 79

¶6

HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the records.

¶8

The present application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 06.08.2024, cognizance / summoning order dated 08.04.2025 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, District Sambhal as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 854 of 2025 (State vs. Subhash), arising out of Case Crime No. 195 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 323, 494 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Gunnaur, District Sambhal, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Gunnaur, District Sambha.

¶9

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 04.08.2025 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶10

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 21.09.2025 the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶11

As per the office report dated 10.12.2025, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record which states that mediation between the parties is successful.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicants argued that parties have settled the dispute amicably before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and the applicant (husband) and the opposite party no. 2 (wife) have decided to reunite and live together as husband and wife, para-7(Ka) and therefore the impugned proceedings/summoning order/charge sheet be quashed on the ground of settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶13

NA528 No. 27956 of 2025

¶14

¶15

From perusal of the report of Mediation Centre of this Court, it appears that in pursuance of the said order the mediation proceedings were taken up which ended in a settlement dated 21.09.2025 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded and they have decided to reunite and live together as husband and wife, para-7(Ka). The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising in the present matter. The parties have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in para 7(Anga) of the said mediation report.

¶16

Learned State counsel could not dispute the factum of compromise between the parties which is on record.

¶17

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.

¶18

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/summoning/charge sheet order as prayed for by the applicants.

¶19

The present application is allowed .

¶20

The impugned summoning order dated 08.04.2025, charge sheet as well as proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.

¶21

December 10, 2025 Manoj

¶22

(Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subhash Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Chandra 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

Pushpa Devi and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinay Kumar Kushwaha and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogendra Alias Gandhi and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhilesh Alias Akhilesh Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Upanshu Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Ishrat vs State of U.P. and 2 Others