Shri Prakash Pandey and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shri Prakash Pandey and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2564 of 2023 (Sheshdhar dubey v. Raivshankar and others) under Sections 120B, 465, 468 and 471 I.P.C. pending before the Judicial Magistrate-II, Bhadohi quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties; application allowed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 07.04.2023 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2564 of 2023 under Sections 120B, 465, 468 and 471 I.P.C. pending before the Judicial Magistrate-II, Bhadohi can be quashed on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties.

Court's answer

From the perusal of the record it is apparent that the parties have entered into a compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject, the present case is a good case for exercising this Court's powers to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicants.

Key takeaways

The entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2564 of 2023 are quashed.ratio¶17
The present application is allowed.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Chawan Prakash, J.) allowed an application under Section 528 BNSS filed by Shri Prakash Pandey and 2 others seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 07.04.2023 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2564 of 2023 (Sheshdhar dubey v. Raivshankar and others) under Sections 120B, 465, 468 and 471 I.P.C., pending before the Judicial Magistrate-II, Bhadohi. The applicants and opposite party no.2 had compromised the dispute (compromise annexed as annexure no.22 and verified by the learned Trial Court), and opposite party no.2 admitted the compromise and raised no objection to quashing. Relying 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 and Parbatbhai Ahir (2017) 9 SCC 641, the Court held that where parties have settled their grievances amicably, the proceedings can be quashed; the entire proceedings were quashed and the application allowed (decision dated March 11, 2026).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4025 of 2025

Shri Prakash Pandey And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Indra Deo Mishra, Santosh Kumar Pandey

Court No. - 80

HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the applicants, Sri Santosh Kumar Pandey, learned Counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State and perused the records.

The present application under Section 528 BNSS, has been filed by the applicants with the prayers to quash the summoning order dated 07.04.2023 as well as entire proceeding of Compliant Case No. 2564 of 2023, Sheshdhar dubey v. Raivshankar and others, under Sections 120B, 465, 468 and 471 I.P.C., pending before the Judicial Magistrate-II, Bhadohi, on the basis of compromise entered into by the parties.

Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants and opposite party no.2 have compromised the dispute, copy of the same is annexed as annexure no.22 to the present application. It is further argued that the said compromise has also been verified by the learned Trial Court concerned, as such the proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 admitted the fact of compromise and stated that he has no objection if the proceeding of the aforesaid case is quashed against the applicants.

From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.

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

A482 No. 4025 of 2025

2

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.

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 as prayed for by the applicants.

The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed .

The present application is allowed .

(Chawan Prakash,J.)

March 11, 2026 Vijay

Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad