Sonia Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

Sonia Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application under Section 528 BNSS allowed; entire proceedings of Case No. 7416 of 2025 (State Vs Sonia) under Sections 318(4), 316(2) B.N.S., arising out of Case Crime no. 39 of 2025, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Rampur, quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings in Case No. 7416 of 2025 (State Vs Sonia) under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) B.N.S., arising out of Case Crime no. 39 of 2025, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Rampur, could be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

On perusal of the record, the Court found it apparent that the parties have entered into a compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject, the present case was held to be a good case for exercising this Court's powers to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicant.

Key takeaways

The entire proceedings of Case No. 7416 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime no. 39 of 2025) were quashed.ratio¶19
The application under Section 528 BNSS was allowed.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Chawan Prakash, J.) allowed an application under Section 528 BNSS and quashed the entire proceedings of Case No. 7416 of 2025 (State Vs Sonia) under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) B.N.S., arising out of Case Crime no. 39 of 2025, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Rampur. The applicant and opposite party no.2 had compromised the dispute, the compromise was stated to have been verified by the Trial Court, and opposite party no.2 admitted the compromise and raised no objection to quashing. Relying on B.S. Joshi, Nikhil Merchant, Manoj Sharma, Gian Singh, Shaifullah and Parbatbhai Ahir, the Court held that where parties have settled their grievances the case can be quashed, found the parties had settled their dispute amicably, and held the case fit for exercise of quashing powers.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 49304 of 2025

Sonia

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Arun Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Keshari Nandan Singh, G.A.

Court No. - 79

HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

Heard Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant, Mr. Keshari Nandan Singh, learned Counsel for 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 applicant with the following prayer:

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed the Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the Criminal Misc. Application and quash the entire proceedings Case No. 7416 of 2025 State Vs Sonia Under Section 318(4),316(2)B.N.S. Police Station Tanda, District- Rampur arising out of Case Crime no. 39 of 2025 pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate District-Rampur, on the basis of aforementioned compromise and all proceedings may directed to be remain stayed, during the pendency of criminal misc application before this Hon'ble Court. "

Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant and opposite party No.2 have compromised the dispute. It is further argued that the said compromise has also been verified by the concerned Trial Court, as such the proceedings against the applicant 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 applicant.

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

NA528 No. 49304 of 2025

2

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 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 applicant.

The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed .

The present application is allowed .

(Chawan Prakash,J.)

April 22, 2026 Vijay

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