HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20218 of 2024 Court No. - 46 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for respondent no.3 and perused the record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the parties are near relatives and on account of some misunderstanding and dispute regarding partition of agricultural land, the impugned FIR was lodged. However, subsequently this Court vide order dated 11.11.2024 had directed the parties to appear before the Mediation and Reconciliation Centre of this Court in order to enable the parties to explore the possibility of resolving their dispute through mediation. Pursuant to the said order, both the parties have appeared before the mediation centre and with the help of mediator they have amicably and genuinely settled all their disputes and differences and now they do not have any grievance against each other. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to a settlement agreement dated 29.11.2024, drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed with the report submitted by the Mediation Centre. The settlement agreement dated 29.11.2024 shall form part of this order. He next submitted that in view of the compromise made between the parties, the impugned FIR be quashed. 4. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 has also appeared and has acknowledged the said compromise. He has categorically stated that respondent no.3 does not want to further contest the present proceedings against the petitioners and has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed. 5. Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 6. This Court is not unmindful of the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jai Raj Singh Tomar, Kavita Tomar, Parul Tomar Counsel for Respondent(s) : Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, G.A. Seeta Devi And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) Court in the case of Narinder 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 entire proceedings of FIR dated 05.08.2024 giving rise to Case Crime No.347 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2), 109 BNS 2023, Police Station- Ajeetmal, District- Auraiya, are hereby quashed. 9. This writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. September 18, 2025 A. Pandey CRLP No. 20218 of 2024 2 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad