Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:109651 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39391 of 2024 Applicant :- Faiyaz Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sarfaraz Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mayank Krishna S Chandel,Vinod Kumar Chandel Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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 charge-sheet dated 14.01.2021, summoning order dated 30.07.2021 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1666 of 2021 (State vs. Faiyaz and others) arising out of Case Crime No.514 of 2020, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Mau, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the parties have amicably settled the dispute out of Court and on account of compromise, they filed Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.43244 of 2023 and this Court by order dated 04.12.2023 has passed the following orders:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the summoning order dated 30.07.202, charge sheet dated 14.01.2021 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.1666 of 2021 ( State Vs. Faiyaz and others), arising out of Case Crime No.514 of 2020, under sections 419, 420,467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Mau pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau on the basis of compromise affidavit dated 6.9.2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of compromise deed dated 6.09.2023 has been annexed as Annexure 6 to this affidavit. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the Court below and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of process of law. 4. Learned A.G.A., however, submits that it is the concerned court below, which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicants may approach the concerned court below and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law. 5. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, both the parties are directed to appear before the Court below along with compromise deed as well certified copy of this order within two weeks from today. It is expected that Court below may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of the parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the Court concerned shall also record the statements of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not? 6. The Court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. 7. For a period of two months, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case. 8. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of." 5. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that in pursuance of this Court order, parties appeared before trial court and trial court on 11.03.2024 verified the parties through their counsels. Verification report is filed as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit. Opposite party no.2 does not want to pursue the case further and proceeding be quashed in terms of compromise. 6. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court, hence, no reason to proceed further. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. Accordingly, the impugned criminal proceeding in Criminal Case No.1666 of 2021 (State vs. Faiyaz and others) arising out of Case Crime No.514 of 2020, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Mau, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau is hereby quashed. 10. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 SKD Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad