HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10555 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present 528 B.N.S.S. application has been filed to quash the Charge Sheet dated 28.06.2022; cognizance order dated 28.07.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 12876 of 2022; case crime no. 267 of 2022, under sections 328, 379, 411, 506 1.P.C., Police station Sipari Bazar, District Jhansi, pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Jhansi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicant no. 1 is mother of opposite party no. 2 and they have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicant approached this Hon'ble Court by filing this 528 application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 30.04.2025 sent the matter to trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 23.06.2025 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 through compromise their private and civil 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Piyush Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Mahesh Kumar Kuntal, G.A. Savita Tripathi And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) allowed to go on. 4. 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. 5. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. Accordingly, the proceedings of Case No. 12876 of 2022; case crime no. 267 of 2022, under sections 328, 379, 411, 506 1.P.C., Police station Sipari Bazar, District Jhansi, is hereby quashed. 9. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed. September 1, 2025 Meenu Singh NA528 No. 10555 of 2025 2 (Deepak Verma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad