Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38030 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1000674 of 2015 Petitioner :- Hausila Verma And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nitin Chandra Mishra,Himanshu Hemant Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Akhand Pratap Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The instant petition has been preferred seeking following main relief(s):- "(i) Issue a Writ, Order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 11.07.2011 and 01.10.2014 annexed herewith as ANNEXURE NO. 1 & 2 to this Writ Petition. (ii) Issue a Writ, Order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Opposite Parties not to arrest the Petitioners in connection with Case Crime No. 1157 of 2010 under Sections 147, 323, 394, 427, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860; under Section 3(1) 10 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 registered at police Station -Sammanpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar." It appears from the record that after considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court vide order dated 29.04.2025 has referred the matter to the C.J.M. concerned for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. The order dated 29.04.2025 on reproduction reads as under:- "Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed the supplementary affidavit annexing therewith the original copy of compromise dated 9.12.2024 entered into between the parties, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 has filed the short counter affidavit, which is also taken on record. Let the compromise and the short counter affidavit be forwarded to the C.J.M. concerned for verification. Learned counsel for the parties submit that some date may be fixed before the learned C.J.M. Accordingly, the parties shall appear before the C.J.M. on 19.05.2025. List immediately after the receipt of the report from the C.J.M." It further appears from the record that vide order dated 19.05.2025 annexed as Annexure No. SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit dated 27.04.2025, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar has verified the compromise entered into between the parties 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 State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435, according to which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023)/under Article 226 of the Constitution of India could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, 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, according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlements between the parties the criminal proceedings can be quashed, as also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present petition 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 petition is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 1157 of 2010, indicated in prayer clause, quoted above, are hereby quashed qua the petitioners. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 4.7.2025 Arun/- Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench