Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18891 Court No. - 14 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3602 of 2017 Applicant :- Padarath Ram Saroj And Anr. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Agarwal,Om Chandra Sahu,Saksham Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Dwijendra Mishra,Govind Prasad,Mehdi Abbas Rizvi,Pankaj Kumar,Siddhant Kumar,Sona Pandey Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. 1. The present application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C (now Section 528 B.N.S.S) with the following prayer:- "(i) यह ककि न्ययाययालय शश्रीमयानन् अपर ममुख्य न्ययाकयकि दण्डयाधधिकियारश्री , किक्ष सस0-32, लखनऊ किके न्ययाययालय मम कविचयारयाधिश्रीन फफौजदयारश्री वियाद ससख्यया-1781/16 ममुकिदमया अपरयाधि ससख्यया-137/2015, अन्तररत धियारया 498 ए/504/506 आई०पश्री०सश्री० वि 3/4 डश्री०पश्री० एक्ट, थयानया - इनन्दरया नरर, धजलया-लखनऊ, आररोप पत्र ससख्यया-31/16 किरो समयाप्त ककियके जयानके किया आदकेश पयाररत किरनके किकी किक पया किरम। (ii) यह ककि उपररोक्त विकररत तथ्ययों एविस आधियारयों किरो दकेखतके हहए सम्मयाननश्रीय न्ययाययालय सके पयाथरनया हहै ककि न्ययाययालय शश्रीमयानन् अपर ममुख्य न्ययाकयकि दण्डयाधधिकियारश्री , किक्ष सस0-32, लखनऊ मम कविचयारयाधिश्रीन शश्रीमयानन् अपर ममुख्य न्ययाकयकि दण्डयाधधिकियारश्री , किक्ष सस0-32, लखनऊ किके न्ययाययालय मम कविचयारयाधिश्रीन फफौजदयारश्री वियाद ससख्यया-1781/16 ममुकिदमया अपरयाधि ससख्यया-137/2015, अन्तररत धियारया - 498 ए/504/506 आई०पश्री०सश्री० वि 3/4 डश्री०पश्री० एक्ट, आररोप पत्र ससख्यया -31/1 थयानया इनन्दरया नरर , धजलया-लखनऊ किकी कियायरवियाहश्री ममुकिदमम किके कविचयारयाधिश्रीन रहतके हहए अथविया अकग्रिम आदकेशयों तकि स्थकरत ककियया जयायके यया ययाकचकियाकितयारररयों किके जमयानत पयाथरनया -पत्र उसश्री कदन (same day) समुनवियाई किर कनस्तयाररत किर कदयया जयायके।" 2. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance upon the compromise dated 20.12.2022, which has been enclosed as Annexure No.1 of the application for interim relief dated 05.04.2024, entered into between the applicant no.1 and the opposite party no.2 as applicant no.2 has already expired during the pendency of the present case. 3. Smt. Kavita- respondent no.2 is present before this Court and she has been regularly appearing before this Court and accepted money ordered by the Court to be paid by the applicant no.1. She has been identified by his counsel Shri Dwijendra Mishra. Respondent no.2 has submitted that she has received the money from the applicant no.1 and now she has no grudge against the applicant(s) and she does not want to press the Case No.1781 of 2016, the proceedings of that case may be set aside. 4. 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, in given facts, based upon the statement made by the complainant before this Court as mentioned above, 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. 5. Accordingly, present application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings, quoted above, are hereby quashed as far as it is related to the applicants. 6. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 4.4.2025 Mohd. Sharif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench