HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 2227 of 2026 Satish Singh .....Applicant(s) Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kaushal Kishore Tewari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 16 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. 1. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Prateek Kumar Dixit Advocate, on behalf of opposite party nos.2 and 3 is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and 3 and perused the record. 3. By means of the instant application, the applicants have prayed to quash the entire criminal proceeding bearing S.T. No. 940 of 2025, crime no- 39 of 2025 u/s 109/125/115(2)/352/351(3)/85 B.N.S. and section 30 of Arms Act at P.S. - Dubagga, District- Lucknow in the light of compromise dated 20.01.2026.

4. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that due to certain misunderstanding, the instant FIR was lodged against the applicants and thereafter the parties sat together and has amicably settled their dispute which has been reduced in writing on 20.01.2026. He added that thereafter the applicants filed the instant application for direction to the trial Court to verify the compromise deed and in compliance of the order dated 06.02.2026, the verification was done and report has been submitted to this Court. He submits that further criminal proceeding in the instant matter would amount to harassment and thus the impugned criminal proceeding may be quashed. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also supported the NA528 No. 2227 of 2026 2 contention of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that parties have amicable settled their dispute and the opposite party no. 2 has no grievance, hence, criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped. 6. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the contention aforesaid. 7. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on 20.01.2026 and said compromise has been verified on 25.03.2026 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned criminal case.

8. In view of the above, as the applicants and opposite parties have entered into compromise and no grievance remains to be agitated and as such, further criminal proceedings in the aforementioned criminal case are liable to be set aside in view of the Judgements of the Apex Court rendered in B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation[2008)9 SCC 677]; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466 . 9. Accordingly, criminal proceedings with regard to entire criminal proceeding bearing S.T. No. 940 of 2025, crime no- 39 of 2025 u/s 109/125/115(2)/352/351(3)/85 B.N.S. and section 30 of Arms Act at P.S. - Dubagga, District- Lucknow are hereby quashed. 10. The compromise shall be part of this order. 11. The application is allowed accordingly. 12. Consigned to record. (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) May 29, 2026 V. Sinha Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench