Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 63219 (ALL)

MUKESH AND 6 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/19535/2025 · 2025-09-15

Nand Prabha Shukla

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 19535 of 2025 Court No. - 78 HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicants, is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed to allow this application and quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 4352 of 2025 (State vs. Dr. Mahesh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 589 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 110, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 117(2) of BNS, 2023 Police Station Dibai, District Bulandshahr including the charge sheet dated 20.12.2024 as well as cognizance and summoning order dated 02.04.2025 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr. At the very outset, learned counsel for the parties submits that the parties have amicably settled their disputes through compromise dated 02.05.2025, which has been placed as Annexure No. "7" to the application. The original compromise deed be placed before the court concerned for its verification. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the Court concerned and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of process of law. Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 does not dispute the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants or Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Srivastava, Saksham Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Yasharth Srivastava Mukesh And 6 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) correctness of the documents relied upon by him. Learned A.G.A., however, submits that it is the Trial Court, which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicants may approach the concerned Court and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, both the parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court along with compromise deed as well certified copy of this order within three weeks from today. It is expected that Court concerned may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of the parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the Court concerned shall also record the statements of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not. The Court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of. September 16, 2025 Puspendra NA528 No. 19535 of 2025 2 (Nand Prabha Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad