Allowed

Mohd. Ashif @ Mr. Mohd. Asif v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Apr 2026NA528/1312/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash a summoning order in a Section 138 NI Act complaint was allowed after the parties compromised and the Senior Registrar verified the compromise; the court relied on Supreme Court precedent permitting quashing on settlement.

What did the court decide?

Summoning order dated 18.03.2025 in Complaint Case No. 82534 of 2024 quashed qua the applicant.

Mohd. Ashif @ Mr. Mohd. Asif vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1312 of 2026

¶3

Mohd. Ashif @ Mr. Mohd. Asif

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rohitash Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Suresh Chandra Pandey

¶7

Court No. - 15

¶8

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Surehs Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

¶10

The present application has been filed seeking quashing of summoning order dated 18.03.2025 passed in Complaint Case No. 82534 of 2024, under Section 138 N.I. Act "M/s Suvidha Microfin Vesus Mr. Mohd. Asif" P.S. Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow, passed by authorized officer, Additional Court no.1, District Lucknow, as contained in Annexure No.1, in the interest of justice.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that parties do not want to pursue the case any further and they have entered into compromise. He further submits that this Court vide order dated 24.04.2026 given a direction to the Senior Registrar to verify the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the Senior Registrar has verified the contents of compromise vide order dated 30.04.2026.

¶12

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has also not denied the aforesaid facts. On instructions received from opposite party no.2, he submits that he has no objection, if the proceedings against the applicant in the aforesaid case are quashed on the basis of the compromise.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected

¶14

NA528 No. 1312 of 2026

¶15

¶16

between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the Senior Registrar.

¶17

The Supreme Court while considering the question of quashing the criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties has held that the Court can use its inherent power to do real and substantial justice and to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties in the cases of B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another , (2003)4 SCC 675 ; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation , (2008) 9 SCC 677 ; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others , (2008) 16 SCC 1 ; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab , (2012) 10 SCC 303 ; Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab , (2014) 6 SCC 466 ; State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others , AIR 2019 SC 1296 and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another , (2017) 9 SCC 641 .

¶18

In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further; the matter is purely of personal nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶19

Application is accordingly allowed and the summoning order dated 18.03.2025 passed in Complaint Case No. 82534 of 2024, under Section 138 N.I. Act "M/s Suvidha Microfin Vesus Mr. Mohjd. Asif" P.S. Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow, passed by authorized officer, Additional Court no.1, District Lucknow, as contained in Annexure No.1, is hereby quashed qua the applicant.

¶20

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶21

May 4, 2026 Muk

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Ashif @ Mr. Mohd. Asif v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Ashif @ Mr. Mohd. Asif v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Poonam vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Rajesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Anil Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Yateendar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Tarun Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. /Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. Lko. and Another

Jagdev Rathaur vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others