HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21327 of 2026 Court No. - 84 HON'BLE PRASHANT MISHRA-I, J. 1. Heard Sri Prem Chandra Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise between the both parties on 12.08.2025 in complaint case no. 3185 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana Navabad, District- Jhansi, (Smt. Neelam Versus Shakti Singh Pathraur), pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Jhansi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant drew attention of this Court on the order passed by this Court on 22.05.2026 by which learned trial court was directed to verify the status and identities of the parties and compromise so entered between them and thereafter send its report. In compliance thereof, the learned trial court has sent its report dated 04.06.2026, according to which, compromise between the applicant and opposite party no. 2 had been verified. It has further been contended that applicant and Opposite Party No. 2 have compromised the matter and opposite party No. 2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicant. The Opposite Party No. 2 is ready to withdraw the criminal prosecution of the applicant and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prem Chandra Dwivedi, Vivek Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shakti Singh Pathraur .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, there is no reason to 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 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, 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 criminal proceedings in complaint case no. 3185 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana Navabad, District-Jhansi, (Smt. Neelam Versus Shakti Singh Pathraur), pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Jhansi, 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. 21327 of 2026 2 (Prashant Mishra-I,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK MANDHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad