#fraudulent compromise

Allahabad HC rules that a petitioner may challenge a 1994 compromise order obtained by fraud, even after the limitation period, by invoking Sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act. The court permits filing an appeal despite the delay, emphasizing that fraud vitiates all proceedings and entitles the aggrieved party to seek redress beyond statutory timelines.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that anticipatory bail granted on the basis of a fraudulent compromise-where the accused failed to fulfill promised payments-is invalid, regardless of whether the accused misused their liberty post-bail. The decision reinforces that deceit in securing bail vitiates the order, setting a precedent for scrutinizing compromise agreements in bail proceedings under BNSS.