Allowed

Surendra Prasad Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Oct 2025NA528/8063/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 528 BNSS sought quashing of proceedings, charge sheet and cognizance order in a cheating and forgery case after the parties compromised. Relying on settled Supreme Court precedent on quashing upon settlement, the High Court allowed the application and quashed the entire proceedings.

What the court decided

AI extract

Surendra Prasad Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8063 of 2025

¶3

Surendra Prasad Gupta

¶4

	Versus ....	.Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Punam Purwar, Vijay	Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Rajeev Kumar, G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 82

¶6

HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Vijay Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Girish Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rajeev Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶8

Vide order dated 11.03.2025, the applicant was directed to file supplementary affidavit annexing certified copy of the compromise as well as the verification proceedings of the compromise. In compliance to it, supplementary affidavit has been filed today in Court by the learned counsel for the applicant, which is taken on record, wherein the verification report made before the court below of both the parties are annexed.

¶9

The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 26989 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 294 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 408 of I.P.C., Police Station Hari Parvat, District Agra, charge sheet dated 17.09.2022, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants states that an order was passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 11.03.2025 directing the applicants to file the said compromise deed before the court concerned which was to be verified by the court concerned. In pursuance of the said order, the court concerned on 26.03.2025 verified the said compromise. Copy of the same is on record. The same is not disputed by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

¶11

NA528 No. 8063 of 2025

¶12

¶13

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 64 1 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.

¶14

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, charge sheet as well as cognizance order as prayed for by the applicant(s).

¶15