Sahab Singh and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42222 of 2025

Sahab Singh And 5 Others

	....	.Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Raj Pal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Anshu Shahi,	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 79

¶6

HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Santosh Chaubey, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Raj Pal, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 4999 of 2025 (State Vs. Sahab Singh and others), under Sections 147, 148, 325, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Chhata, District Mathura, arising out of Case Crime No. 259 of 2024, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Chhata, District Mathura, on the basis of compromise dated 28.01.2026.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicant approached this Court by filing this 528 BNSS application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, this Court vide order dated 23.02.2026 directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 31.03.2026 verified the parties as well as compromise application. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the 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 their dispute through compromise and, as such, opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicant. Opposite party no.2

¶10

NA528 No. 42222 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicant and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Accordingly, entire proceedings of Case No. 4999 of 2025 (State Vs. Sahab Singh and others), under Sections 147, 148, 325, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Chhata, District Mathura, arising out of Case Crime No. 259 of 2024, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Chhata, District Mathura, are hereby quashed in terms of compromise dated 28.01.2026.

¶17

This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.

¶18

(Chawan Prakash,J.)

¶19

April 27, 2026 v.k. updh.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sahab Singh and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahab Singh and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ankit Dwivedi and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Gulam Rasool and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajaruddin @ Salman Audi vs State of U.P. and Another

Shainky Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar Patel and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mukesh and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another