Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:103864 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38783 of 2024 Applicant :- Siddhu Ram And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Ram Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anand Kumar Shukla,G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 30.12.2003 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.5777 of 2005 (Old No. 1110 of 2004) (State Vs. Siddhu Ram and Others) under sections 324, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Harraiya, District Basti, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-First, Basti arising out of Case Crime No.49 of 2003 under sections 308, 324, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and the summoning order dated 04.05.2005 passed by Second Additional Civil Judge, Junior Division, Basti. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 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 13.02.2025 sent the matter to trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 17.03.2025 verified the parties as well as compromise application. 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. 4. 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. 5. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court, hence, no reason to proceed further. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. Accordingly, the impugned summoning order dated 04.05.2005 passed by Second Additional Civil Judge, Junior Division, Basti in Criminal Case No.5777 of 2005 (Old No. 1110 of 2004), under sections 324, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Harraiya, District Basti, is hereby quashed. 9. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad