Allahabad High Court
VIBHAS CHANDRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMIT GOPAL
Holding
The Court held that a settlement between the parties warrants quashing of the criminal proceedings under Section 528 BNSS.
Summary
Vibhas Chandra filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the summoning order dated 12‑02‑2019 and the charge‑sheet in a criminal case (Sections 498‑A, 323, 504, 506 IPC) pending before the ACJM‑II, Prayagraj. The matter was referred to the Court’s Mediation Centre, where the parties amicably settled their dispute and agreed to withdraw the pending criminal proceedings. The State counsel raised no objection to the settlement. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow quashing of criminal cases where the parties have settled, the High Court held that the settlement justified dismissal of the proceedings. Consequently, the application was allowed and the summoning order and charge‑sheet were quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal proceeding can be quashed on the basis of a settlement between the parties under Section 528 of the BNSS
- Whether the Court has jurisdiction to quash the summoning order and charge‑sheet following a mediated settlement
Legislation cited
- BNSS Act — s. 528
Subjects
- settlement
- quash criminal proceedings
- Section 528 BNSS
- mediation
- IPC offences
- case withdrawal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7753 of 2025
Vibhas Chandra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Samarth Krishna, Sandeep Saxena
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Samarth Krishna, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri
Devendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the State and perused the
records.
3. Notice issued to the opposite party no.2 vide order dated 03.04.2025
has been served personally as per office report dated 13.04.2026. Despite
service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2 even
when the matter has been taken up in the revised list.
4. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicant Vibhas Chandra, with the prayer to quash the summoning
order dated 12.02.2019 in Case Crime No. 48 of 2018 as well as charge
sheet no. 01 dated 11.10.2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC,
Police Station Mahila Thana, District Prayagraj, pending before the court
of ACJM-II, Prayagraj and with the further prayer to stay the further
proceedings of aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application.
5. The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide
order dated 03.04.2025 for making an effort between the parties for
settling their disputes amicably.
6. As per report of Mediation Centre dated 11.09.2025 the parties have
amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases
going on between them further they have decided to reunite and live
together rest of their lives in view of interim settlement agreement dated
15.05.2025.
7. As per the office report dated 13.04.2026, a report from the Mediation
Centre of this Court is on record.
NA528 No. 7753 of 2025
2
8. From perusal of the report of Mediation Centre of this Court, it appears
that in pursuance of the said order the mediation proceedings were taken
up which ended in a settlement dated 11.09.2025 between the parties and
the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and
even the dispute arising in the present matter. The parties have agreed to
withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in
para 7(n) of the said mediation report.
9. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the said proposition.
10. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement
arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of
(1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4
SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation :
(2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16
SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5)
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC
278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur
and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has
held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can
be quashed.
11. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court
on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising
powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the
applicant(s).
12. The present application is allowed.
13. The summoning order dated 12.02.2019 as well as charge sheet no. 01
dated 11.10.2018 passed in the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.
(Samit Gopal,J.)
May 7, 2026
M. ARIF
Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…