HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7055 of 2026 Court No. - 74 HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present 528 B.N.S.S. application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 12.03.2024 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Tilhar, Shahjahanpur as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.5319 of 2023 (Smt.Sanju alias Sanjna vs. Sanjeev Balmiki & others), under Sections 498A, 504 I.P.C.& 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Tilhar, Shahjahanpur on the basis of compromise dated 15.12.2025. 3. It is alleged in the complaint that the applicant no.1 is husband of opposite party no.2 and on account of some matrimonial dispute, complaint has lodged by opposite party no.2. Now parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into compromise and opposite party no.2 is residing with the applicants. Applicants have filed the present complaint to quash the proceeding on the ground of compromise dated 15.12.2025. No dispute remain pending between the parties. He next submitted that this Court by order dated 19.02.2026 directed both the parties to appear before trial court for verification of compromise. 4. Pursuant to the said order dated 19.02.2026, the parties appeared before the court below and trial court identified and verified the parties through their counsel on 25.02.2026 and verification report is forwarded to this Court through letter dated 06.04.2026. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled their private and civil dispute through compromise 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 applicant and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gaurav Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Sudhanshu Pratap Singh, G.A. Sanjeev Balmiki And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) to go on. 6. 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 He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed. 7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant and opposite party no. 2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. There is no dispute remain pending between the parties. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further. 8. Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matters of Krishnappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka; 2021 0 Supreme(SC) 529, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and another; 2017 9 SCC 641, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another; (2008) 9 Supreme Court Cases 677, Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another; (2014) Supreme Today 642, the proceedings of the Complaint Case No.3565 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 323 I.P.C.& 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Hathras, pending before the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), F.T.C.-II, Hathras is hereby quashed. 9. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed. May 7, 2026 SKD NA528 No. 7055 of 2026 2 (Deepak Verma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad