Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25188 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1315 of 2025 Appellant :- Ram Yagya Mishr And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Suneel Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants-appellants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. Sri Kumar Gaurav Srivastava, Advocate, has filed vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2, same is taken on record. 2. By means of present criminal appeal u/s 14A(1) of the SC/ST Act, the appellants have prayed for quashing the charge sheet no. 01/2024, filed in Case Crime No. 225 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352 of BNSS and Section 3(1)Da & Dha of SC/ST Act as well as entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 21 of 2025 - State Vs. Ram Yagya Mishr and Others, pending before the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gonda, in the light of compromise dated 06.02.2025 (Annexure - 4 to the affidavit filed in support of application). 3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that this Court by means of order dated 24.02.2025, directed the parties to appear before Court concerned for verification of the compromise dated 06.02.2025. In compliance of aforesaid order, the parties appeared before the Court concerned and the trial Court has verified the compromise and a report dated 12.03.2025 to this effect has been submitted for perusal of this Court. Therefore, the charge sheet as well as entire proceedings of aforesaid criminal case may be quashed in view of the compromise dated 06.02.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008) 16 SCC 1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand, (2014) 9 SCC 653 and has submitted that the applicants as well as opposite party no. 2 have compromised the dispute and as such opposite party no. 2 does not want to press the present case against the applicants. 5. Learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 and learned Additional Government Advocate have stated that they have no objection in case the charge sheet as well as proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed in the light of the compromise. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that the parties have entered into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably. 8. In this regard, the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State (supra), Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (supra) and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (supra), which have been relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicants finds force that this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the proceedings as the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. 9. In the light of the fact that the settlement has arrived at between the applicants-appellants and the private respondent and does not effect the public at large, and would only amount to private dispute between the parties, no useful purpose will be served will be served by allowing the applicants-appellants to be prosecuted in the said trial, therefore the charge sheet no. 01/2024, filed in Case Crime No. 225 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352 of BNSS and Section 3(1)Da & Dha of SC/ST Act as well as entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 21 of 2025, are hereby quashed, accordingly present criminal appeal under Section 14A(1) of SC/ST Act, is allowed. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench