HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42492 of 2024 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present application has been filed to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 28.11.2018, cognizance/summoning order dated 28.03.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Special Session Trial No.62 of 2019 (State Vs. Ajmat Ahmad Khan and another) arising out of Case Crime No.314 of 2018, under section 354 IPC and sections 11/12 of POCSO Act, P.S. Bhelupur, District- Varanasi, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Varanasi. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants submitted that compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified by learned court of Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional District and Session Judge, Varanasi on dated 01.08.2025, which has been appended along with the records, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for opposite parties. 4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise. 5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anchal Kumar Rao, G.A. Dheeraj Kannaujiya And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. 6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties. 7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, charge-sheet dated 28.11.2018, cognizance/summoning order dated 28.03.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Special Session Trial No.62 of 2019 (State Vs. Ajmat Ahmad Khan and another) arising out of Case Crime No.314 of 2018, under section 354 IPC and sections 11/12 of POCSO Act, P.S. Bhelupur, District- Varanasi, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Varanasi, are hereby quashed. 8. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed. 9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties. If at all, opposite party no.2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application. 10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today. September 11, 2025 Saif A482 No. 42492 of 2024 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad