Allowed

Sanjay Chaudhary and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2025NA528/8062/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Section 528 BNSS application, the Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 323, 308, and 325 IPC arising from a private dispute where the parties had amicably settled the matter following a charge-sheet and cognizance order.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of entire impugned proceedings, including charge-sheet and cognizance/order of summoning against applicants Sanjay Chaudhary and Jayanti Prasad.

Sanjay Chaudhary and Another vs State of… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:112829

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8062 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Sanjay Chaudhary And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Raj Counsel for Opposite Party :- Devidayal Tiwari,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

This application u/s 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 16.06.2024 as well as cognizance order dated 16.01.2025 & order dated 24.02.2025, of S.T. No. 89 of 2025 (State Vs. Sanjay Chaudhary and others), arising out of Case Crime No.183 of 2024, under Sections 323, 308, 325 IPC, P.S.- Etmaddaula, District- Agra, pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Agra on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶9

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the alleged dispute between the parties has taken place due to misconception and that now both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and the informant of the case and the injured do not want to pursue the impugned proceedings. In the alleged incident, the injured has not sustained any serious injury. The compromise filed by the parties before the trial court, has already been verified by the court concerned. It was submitted that in view of these facts no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned proceedings pending and thus the same may be quashed.

¶10

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has concurred with the arguments of

¶11

learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter and the informant and the injured do not want to proceed with the case pending before the trial court and thus, the impugned proceedings may be quashed.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has no objection if parties compromise the matter.

¶13

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

¶14

It is well settled that in appropriate cases criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise by invoking inherent powers enshrined under Section 528 BNSS. In the instant case, the matter relates to private dispute between the parties. If parties compromise the matter, it would not have adverse impact on society. The informant of the case and the injured do not want to pursue the impugned proceedings. There is nothing to indicate that applicants have any criminal antecedents. The compromise filed by the parties before the trial court, has already been verified by the court concerned. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed.

¶15

In view of the aforesaid, entire impugned proceedings, including charge-sheet & cognizance / summoning order, of the aforesaid case, against applicants, namely, Sanjay Chaudhary & Jayanti Prasad are hereby quashed.

¶16

The application u/s 528 BNSS is allowed .

¶17

Order Date :- 14.7.2025

¶18

'SP'/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjay Chaudhary and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Chaudhary and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shahnwaj Alias Shahnwaj Saifi vs State of U.P. and Another

Indel Alias Inder Prasad and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Chintu and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajay Kumar Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramesh Chand and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajay Singh vs State of U.P. and Another