Dharmendra Kumar Dubey @ Dharmendra Dubey and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40641 of 2025

¶3

Dharmendra Kumar Dubey @ Dharmendra Dubey And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Janardan Prasad Bhushan Tripathi	Tripathi, Shashi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Anil Kumar Tiwari,	G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 79

¶7

HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

¶8

Heard Sri Shashi Bhushan Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, Smt. Ruchi Kashyap, Advocate holding brief of Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

The present 528 BNSS application has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Case No.716 of 2024 (State vs. Akshay Debey & Anr.) arising out of Case Crime No.326 of 2022 under Sections 352, 323, 354, 452, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Tharwai, District Prayagraj as well as summoning order dated 7.10.2024 passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate 5th, Allahabad.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicants approached this Hon'ble Court by filing this 528 BNSS application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 10.2.2026 directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 13.3.2026 verified the parties as well as compromise application. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the

¶11

NA528 No. 40641 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶15

Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

¶16

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688 , wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non-compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278] , in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.

¶18

Accordingly, the proceedings of Case No.716 of 2024 (State vs. Akshay Debey & Anr.) arising out of Case Crime No.326 of 2022 under Sections 352, 323, 354, 452, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Tharwai, District Prayagraj as well as summoning order dated 7.10.2024 passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate 5th, Allahabad are hereby

¶19

NA528 No. 40641 of 2025

¶20

3

¶21

quashed.

¶22