Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:109950 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43191 of 2024 Applicant :- Mustkeem Ali And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nitin Chandra Mishra,Raminder Singh Jaggi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anuj Kumar Srivastava,G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicants 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 entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1083 of 2016 (State vs. Mustkeem Ali and others) arising out of Case Crime No.22 of 2024, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Tehrauli, District Jhansi. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicants 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.24522 of 2017 and this Court by order dated 21.10.2024 has passed the following orders:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 1 State. 2. Despite revision of list no one has appeared on behalf of opposite party no. 2. 3. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 1083 of 2016 (State versus Mustkeem Ali and others) under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station-Tharouli, District-Jhansi. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have thereafter entered into compromise dated 31.07.2017, which has already been filed before the trial court and is pending verification. 5. Learned A.G.A. for the opposite party no. 1, on the basis of instructions, admits that the parties have entered into compromise. 6. In view of aforesaid, liberty is granted to the applicants to appear before the trial court within a period of two weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order, for the purposes of verification of the compromise already filed. 7. On appearance of parties within the aforesaid time period, the trial court shall consider the verification of the compromise in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a further period of two months. 8. Till verification of the compromise, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in pursuance of Case No. 1083 of 2016 (State versus Mustkeem Ali and others) under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station-Tharouli, District-Jhansi. 9. In case the compromise is verified, liberty is granted to applicants to file a fresh application seeking quashing of the aforesaid proceedings. 10. In view of aforesaid, the application stands disposed of." 5. Learned counsel for the applicants next submits that in pursuance of this Court order, parties appeared before trial court and trial court on 14.11.2024 verified the parties through their counsels. Verification report is filed as Annexure SA-2 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 and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 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.1083 of 2016 (State vs. Mustkeem Ali and others) arising out of Case Crime No.22 of 2024, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Tehrauli, District Jhansi, 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