Satyam @ Deependra Chaurasiya and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the material placed on record.

¶13

By means of the instant application, the applicants have prayed to quash the entire proceeding of Case no. 61452/2025 Crime no. 113/2025 U/s 351 (3) B.N.S. (U/s 506 IPC) Police Station Kachhauna, District Hardoi, styled as State...Vs.... Satyam alias Deependra Chaurasiya and other as well as impugned summoning order dated 8.12.2025 and charge sheet dated 5.4.2025 as contained in Annexure no. 1 and 2 to this petition.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that due to certain misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. was lodged against the applicants. He added that later on, the parties sat together and have amicably settled their disputes, which has been reduced in writing on 20.01.2026. Thereafter, the applicants filed an Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 305 of 2026 wherein this Court vide order dated 02.02.2026 has directed the trial court to verify the said compromise deed and in compliance thereof, the compromise deed was verified on 23.02.2026. He submits that now there is no dispute in between the parties and they have settled their dispute. He submits that further criminal proceedings in the instant matter would amount to harassment and, thus, the instant criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶15

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also supported the version of

¶16

NA528 No. 2061 of 2026

¶17

2

¶18

the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the opposite party no.2 has no grievance, hence, criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.

¶19

Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the submissions aforesaid.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on 20.01.2026 and said compromise has been verified on 23.02.2026 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned criminal proceedings against the applicants.

¶21

In view of the above, as the applicants and opposite parties have entered into compromise on 20.01.2026 and no grievance remains to be agitated and, as such, further criminal proceedings in the aforementioned criminal case are liable to be set aside in view of the Judgments of the Apex Court rendered in 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; and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶22

Accordingly, entire criminal proceedings against the applicants in Case no. 61452/2025 Crime no. 113/2025 U/s 351 (3) B.N.S. (U/s 506 IPC) Police Station Kachhauna, District Hardoi, summoning order dated 8.12.2025 and charge sheet dated 5.4.2025, are hereby quashed.

¶23

The compromise shall be part of this order.

¶24

The application is allowed accordingly.

¶25

Consigned to the records.

¶26

May 20, 2026

¶27

Mayank

¶28

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)