MUKUL TYAGI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 13516 of 2026

Mukul Tyagi And 2 Others
                                                              .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                                 .....Opposite
                                                                       Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                         :   Balram Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                    :   G.A.

Court No. - 83
                    HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Sri N.K. Singh, Advocate filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite
party No.2, is taken on record.

2. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

3. Heard Sri Balram Singh, learned counsel for applicants, Sri Balram
Singh, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and learned AGA for the
State.

4. The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. has been
filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated
29.08.2024, summoning/cognizance order dated 19.02.2025 and the entire
proceeding of Criminal Case No. 2534 of 2025 (State vs. Mukul Tyagi
and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 88 of 2024, under Sections
498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station
Mahila Thana, District Sambhal, pending in the Court of Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal at Chandausi.

5. 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 3.4.2026 directed the parties to appear
before the trial court for verification of the parties and compromise
application. Trial court vide order dated 21.5.2026 verified the parties as
                                                         NA528 No. 13516 of 2026
                               2


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.

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 by him. He
submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in
the aforesaid case are quashed.

7. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute
out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. Accordingly, the proceedings of aforesaid case are hereby quashed in
respect of present applicants.
                                                                                     NA528 No. 13516 of 2026
                                                                3


                                    11. This application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. is accordingly
                                    allowed.



                                                                                    (Chawan Prakash,J.)
                                    October 1, 2026
                                    Md Faisal




Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad