Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111200 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35563 of 2024 Applicant :- Saddam And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- Rajesh Kumar Verma,G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 01.12.2022, cognizance/summoning order dated 27.03.2023 passed by Upper Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.5, District Bareilly as well as the entire proceedings of Case no. 980 of 2023 (State Vs. Saddam & others), arising out of Case Crime No. 243 of 2022, under sections 307, 323, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C., Police Station- Fatehganj West, District-Bareilly, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, District Bareilly, on the basis of compromise. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that though allegation has been made in the first information report in regard to fire arm injury but there is no fire arm injury and injuries are simple in nature. He next submitted that applicants, opposite party no.2 and injured have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicant approached this Hon'ble Court by filing this 482 application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 23.01.2025 passed following order:- "Sri Rajesh Kumar Verma, Advocate filed vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 which is taken on record. Office is directed to show the name of Sri Rajesh Kumar Verma, in the appropriate column of counsel in the next cause list. Learned counsel for both the parties submitted that parties settled their dispute arising out of offence punishable under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506, 34 of I.P.C. on the basis of compromise dated 27.9.2024. Original compromise is annexed in supplementary affidavit as Annexure-SA-1. Office is directed to send original compromise to court concerned for verification immediately after retaining a photocopy of the same. Both the parties are directed to appear before the court concerned within three weeks from today. Court concerned is directed to verify the same. Applicants are directed to file supplementary affidavit annexing certified copy of the compromise as well as proceedings of verification of compromise. Put up this case on 29.5.2025, as fresh. Till the next date of listing, further proceedings of Case No. 980 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 243 of 2022, under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506, 34 of I.P.C., P.S. Fatehganj West, District Bareilly, pending in the court of A.C.J.M., V, District Bareilly, shall remain stayed against the applicants. " 5. In pursuance of order of this Court dated 23.01.2025, parties appeared before the Trial Court and Trial court vide order dated 11.03.2025 verified the parties as well as contents of the compromise application through their counsels. Verification Report dated 11.03.2025 has been filed with the supplementary affidavit. 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 private and civil 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 impugned charge sheet dated 01.12.2022, cognizance/summoning order dated 27.03.2023 passed by Upper Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 5, District Bareilly as well as the entire proceedings of Case no. 980 of 2023 (State Vs. Saddam & others), arising out of Case Crime No. 243 of 2022, under sections 307, 323, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C., Police Station- Fatehganj West, District- Bareilly, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, District Bareilly, are hereby quashed. 11. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Aditya Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad