HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7905 of 2022 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed today by learned A.G.A. is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State. 3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of entire proceedings of Case No. 2116 of 2021 (Old Case No. 1462 of 2020), State Vs. Rinku Gangwar and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 235 of 2020, under Section 376 I.P.C. against the applicant no. 1 and under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act against the applicant no. 2, P.S.- Shahi, District- Bareilly, pending in the court of J.M.-III, Bareilly, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the opposite party no. 2 has lodged first information report of this case under misconception and that now both the parties have amicably settled the dispute compromised the case. It was submitted that allegations against applicant no. 1 was that he has established physical relations with opposite party no. 2 / informant on pretext of marriage. The opposite party no. 2 is a 25 years old lady. In pursuance to order of this Court, both the parties have filed compromise before the Trial Court, which has duly been verified. It was submitted that in view of these facts and circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned proceedings pending and thus, the impugned proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Karunesh Narayan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sunil Kumar Srivastava Rinku Gangwar And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has concurred with the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter and the informant does not want to proceed with the case pending before the trial court and thus, the impugned proceedings may be quashed. 6. Learned A.G.A. has no objection if parties compromise the matter. 7. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. 8. It is well settled that in appropriate cases criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties, by invoking inherent powers enshrined under Section 528 BNSS. In the instant case, the applicant no. 1 is facing trial for offence under Section 376 I.P.C. and the applicant no. 2 is facing trial for offence under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act. Though, normally the proceedings of a case under Section 376 I.P.C. can not be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties, however in the present case the allegation against applicant no. 1 is that he has established physical relations with informant on pretext of marriage and later made demand of dowry and refused to marry with her. The informant is stated a 25 years old lady. The applicant no. 2 is father of applicant no. 1. In view of nature of accusations and attending facts, it would not be just and proper to decline prayer of quashing of proceedings merely because charge sheet has been submitted under Section 376 I.P.C. Both the parties have compromised the case. The compromise has already been verified by the Court concerned. Considering aforesaid entire facts of the matter, it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed. 9. In view of the aforesaid, entire impugned proceedings of the aforesaid case, against applicants, namely, Rinku Gangwar and Chokhe Lal are hereby quashed. 10. The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. September 10, 2025 SK Srivastava A482 No. 7905 of 2022 2 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad