Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:1144 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30 of 2025 Applicant :- Sani Alias Shani Rawat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Singh Yadav,Sandeep Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Sri Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate, has put in appearance for the private opposite party nos. 2 to 5 and has filed his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record. The instant application has been filed for quashing charge sheet dated 26.12.2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 0399 of 2020, under sections 307 and 504 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station- Banthara, District- Lucknow and also quash the Summoning/Cognizance order dated 04.01.2021 passed by Court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow in S.T. No. 169 of 2024; State of U.P. Versus Shani Rawat, passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge -13, Lucknow. It appears that after considering the facts of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants including the fact that incident/altercation occurred on account of matrimonial dispute between the applicant and the opposite party no. 2, who is wife of the applicant, and the offence against the applicant, this Court vide order dated 02.12.2024 passed in APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 10585 of 2024 referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. It appears from the order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure No. 6) that the trial Court has verified the compromise, mentioning therein that the parties were present and they have admitted that they have entered into an agreement voluntarily and their signatures have been verified by their respective counsels before the court. Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409 as also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and hence no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, present application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings arising out of FIR No./Case Crime No., quoted above, are hereby quashed qua the applicant. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 7.1.2025 Mohit Singh/- Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench