HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37159 of 2026 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J. 1. Sri Vijay Bahadur, Advocate filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party No.2, is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Srivastava learned counsel for applicants, Sri Vijay Bahadur, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and learned AGA for the State. 3. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 19.12.2025 and entire proceeding of Case No. 59715 of 2026 (State Vs. Shamu Lal Chakrawal and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 207 of 2025, under sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Chetganj, District Varanasi. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicants approached this Court by filing this application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, this Court vide order dated 10.7.2026 passed in Application U/S 528 BNSS No.27169 of 2026, directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shamu Lal Chakrawal And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) court vide order dated 15.7.2026 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 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 allowed to go on. 5. Learned AGA 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 he has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed. 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 charge sheet dated 19.12.2025 and entire proceeding of Case No. 59715 of 2026 (State Vs. Shamu Lal Chakrawal and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 207 of 2025, under sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Chetganj, District Varanasi are hereby quashed. NA528 No. 37159 of 2026 2 9. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed. September 8, 2026 Md Faisal NA528 No. 37159 of 2026 3 (Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAISAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad