Court No. - 14 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2203 of 2010 Applicant :- Ghan Shyam Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rana Mrityunjay Singh,Alok Mohan Upadhyaya,Rahul Kumar Singh,Vaibhav Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Manoj Kumar Verma Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. (I.A. No. 6 of 2025) This is an application seeking recall of the order dated 23.04.2025. Cause shown in the accompanying affidavit filed in support of the instant application is found to be satisfactory. Learned AGA has no objection in allowing the present application. Application is allowed. Order dated 23.04.2025 is hereby recalled. Case is restored to its original number. (Order on application) Heard. Shri Rahul Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit bringing on record the copy of the verification of the compromise order dated 19.04.2025. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Shri Manoj Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. The present case has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. /528 of B.N.S.S. with the following main relief:- " For the facts, reasons and circumstances mentioned in the accompanying affidavit, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the proceeding of Complaint Case No. 4323/2009 arising out of Crime No. 464/2008 U/s 504/506/352 IPC and 3(i)(x) of SC/ST Act lodged with Police Station madhoganj District Hardoi Pradeep Versus Ghanshyam Sharma pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4 Hardoi thereby summoning the petitioner vide order dated 29.04.2010 and next date is fixed for 29.05.2010 " Learned counsel for the respective parties have submitted that a compromise dated 05.03.2025 (annexure no. SA-2) entered into between the parties has been verified by the learned trial court by its order dated 19.04.2025 (annexure no. SA-1) in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 26.03.2025 passed in the present case. Learned Counsel for the respondent no. 2 has submitted that respondent no. 2 has no grudge or grievance against the present applicant now. It appears from the order dated 19.04.2025 (Annexure No.SA 1) that the trial court has verified the compromise. 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) 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 settlement 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 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, quoted above, are hereby quashed as far as it is related to the 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 :- 9.5.2025 Ashish Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench