KALPIT PRAJAPATI @ KALPIT KUMAR PRAJAPATI AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36207 of 2026


Kalpit Prajapati @ Kalpit Kumar Prajapati And 3
Others                                                       .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)              :      Neetu Mishra, Sanskar Gaur
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)         :      G.A., Satanand Mishra

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

1. Heard Ms. Neetu Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr.
Satanand Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, 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 for
quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 58225 of 2018, CNR No.
UPKN040583382018 (State Vs. Kalpit Preajapati and others), under
Sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station
Barra, District Kanpur Nagar, arising out of Case Crime No. 0681 of 2017
as well as cognizance order dated 23.10.2018, pending in the court of
learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/FTC, Kanpur Nagar, on
the basis of compromise dated 28.04.2026.

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 this application under Section
528 BNSS with prayer to quash the proceedings in terms of compromise
entered between the parties and this Court vide order dated 07.05.2026
directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the
parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated
29.05.2026 verified the parties as well as compromise application. He
further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 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
                                                                                          NA528 No. 36207 of 2026
                                                                   2


                                    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 counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and 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 aforesaid case, are hereby quashed
                                    in terms of compromise dated 28.04.2026.

                                    8. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed.



                                                                                         (Chawan Prakash,J.)
                                    September 15, 2026
                                    v.k. updh.




Digitally signed by :-
VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad