HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39830 of 2026 Court No. - 84 HON'BLE PRASHANT MISHRA-I, J. 1. Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sampurnanand, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kaushal Kant Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint No. 65 of 2022 (Najrana Vs. Samsuddin and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Line Bazar, District- Jaunpur on the basis of compromise dated-16.03.2026/application dated 06.08.2026, pending before the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/ Crime Against Women/ Judicial Magistrate Jaunpur. 3. It has been contended on behalf of the parties that compromise has taken place between the parties in Complaint No. 65 of 2022 (Najrana Vs. Samsuddin and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 D.P. Act and opposite party no. 2 has, specifically, in her application dated 06.08.2026 stated that parties have compromised the matter and has prayed to put an end to the pending litigation. It is next submitted that in view of the compromise so entered between the parties, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on. 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, there is no reason to Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, Mohd Intesaf Khan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jitendra Kumar Maurya, Kaushal Kant Dubey Shamsuddin And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) proceed further. 5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases 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 had 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. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, also going through the record that report of the mediation and conciliation centre is on record which reflects that parties have entered into compromise in the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case. 7. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Complaint No. 65 of 2022 (Najrana Vs. Samsuddin and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Line Bazar, District- Jaunpur on the basis of compromise dated-16.03.2026/application dated 06.08.2026, pending before the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/ Crime Against Women/ Judicial Magistrate Jaunpur, are hereby quashed. 8. This application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 is accordingly allowed. September 29, 2026 A. Mandhani NA528 No. 39830 of 2026 2 (Prashant Mishra-I,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK MANDHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad