HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39024 of 2026 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 15.05.2025 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 21.11.2025 and entire proceedings of Case No. 42135 of 2025 (State Vs. Deepak Rana and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 0083 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 85, B.N.S and Section 3/4 Dowry prohibition Act against applicant nos. 1 and 2 and under Sections 79, 77, 115(2), 85, B.N.S and under Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against the applicant no. 3 and the order dated 21.07.2026 passed by Civil Judge (J.D)/J.M./F.T.C. Ghaziabadm, Police Station- Shalimar Garden, District Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D) / F.t.C, Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad. 3. 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 Application under Section 528 BNSS No.32464 of 2026 with prayer to quash the proceedings in terms of compromise entered between the parties and this Court vide order dated 07.08.2026 directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 26.08.2026 verified the parties as well as compromise application. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Samar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Deepak Rana And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) have settled their 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 applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on. 4. Learned A.G.A. submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. Accordingly, entire proceedings of the aforesaid case, are hereby quashed in terms of compromise. 8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed. September 16, 2026 Rmk. NA528 No. 39024 of 2026 2 (Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad