Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28238 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1479 of 2025 Appellant :- Nikhil Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Himanshu Tiwari,Vijay Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Mr. Rahul Yadav, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 today in Court is taken on record. 2. The present appeal under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred assailing the summoning order 27.02.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Misc. Criminal Case No. 352 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 222 of 2022 under Sections 505 (1) (B) of I.P.C. and Sections 3 (1) (Da) (Dha) and 3 (2) (v a) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow and the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case may also be quashed. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the parties have entered into a compromise (by means of compromise deed dated 05.03.2025), which has been verified by the court below on 26.04.2025 in compliance of order passed by this Court on 21.04.2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 1159 of 2025. 4. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for applicant/appellant or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid are quashed. 5. Learned counsel for appellant in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and has submitted that the appellant and opposite party no. 2 have settled through compromise their private and civil disputes and as such opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the appellant. Opposite party no. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the appellant and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on. 6. From perusal of the record, it is apparent that the parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably and it is highly doubtful if the ingredients of the offence as alleged are made out. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise entered into between the parties. Taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the compromise between the parties be accepted and further taking into account the legal position as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (supra), Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (supra) the entire proceedings of the Misc. Criminal Case No. 352 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 222 of 2022 under Sections 505 (1) (B) of I.P.C. and Sections 3 (1) (Da) (Dha) and 3 (2) (v a) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow are hereby quashed. 8. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present criminal appeal stands allowed. . (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Virendra Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench