IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.
Mahendra Singh and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Application U/s 528 BNSS No. 33773 of 2025
Decided On : 17-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initial court hearing and participants (Para 1) |
| 2. application details and underlying case information (Para 2) |
| 3. verification of compromise deed by the court (Para 3) |
| 4. precedent on quashing cases based on settlements (Para 4) |
| 5. justification for quashing the case (Para 5) |
| 6. ruling to quash proceedings (Para 6 , 7) |
TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 1137 of 2020 ( State Vs. Mahendra Singh and others ), arising out of Case Crime No. 0091 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and 3/4 DP Act, Police Station Tehrauli, District Jhansi, charge sheet dated 20.10.2019 as well as cognizance order dated 12.10.2020 passed in the aforesaid case, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Garautha, Jhansi.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants states that an order was passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 04.09.2025 directing the applicants to file the said compromise deed before the court concerned which was to be verified by the court concerned. In pursuance of the said order, the court concerned on 17.09.2025 verified the said compromise. Copy of the same is on record. The same is not disputed by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
4. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement 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.
5. 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, charge sheet as well as cognizance order as prayed for by the applicant(s).
6. The present application is allowed.
7. The entire proceedings, charge sheet as well as cognizance order of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.
B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another
Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab
Parbatbhai Ahir @ Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another
AI
Settlement between parties can lead to the quashing of legal proceedings, as established in precedent. Courts may exercise quashing powers when grievances are resolved.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.