HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5100 of 2021 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard. 2. This application has been filed with the following main relief:- "To Set-aside the impugned Summoning order dated 23/03/2021 passed by Learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Faizabad/ Ayodhya in Complaint Case No.648 of 2019 in re. Smt. Shikha Srivastava Vs. Abhinav Saxena & others U/s 180 R.p.c. as well as proceedings of the Complaint Case No.648 of 2019 Smt. Shikha Srivastava Vs. Abhinav Saxena & others treated U/s 180 Cr.P.c. pending before Learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Faizabad/ Ayodhya which is now fixed on 09/12/2021 for further proceedings, and this petition/ application may kindly be allowed with costs, in the interest of justice." 3. This Court, vide order dated 04.09.2024 passed in FIRST APPEAL No. 114 of 2023 (Abhinav Saxena Vs. Smt. Shikha Srivastava and Another) referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, for amicable settlement between the parties. 4. In compliance of order of this Court dated 04.09.2024, the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court alongwith settlement agreement dated 27.02.2025 has submitted its report, which has been annexed as 'Annexure No.1 to the Application for Taking Compromise Deed on Record (I.A. No. 04 of 2025)', wherein it has been mentioned 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. 5. The relevant para of settlement agreement 27.02.2025 is extracted herein-under: Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prabhaat Kumar Tripathi, Bhartendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Gaurav Kumar Hasani Abhinav Saxena And Ors. .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And Ors. .....Opposite Party(s) "F. That the parties have agreed to withdraw/not to pursue the cases filed against each others. The details of the cases are mentioned hereunder: (i) Case No.145 of 2019 U/S 12 of D. V. Act pending before Additional Civil Judge/ (Sr. Div.)-II/ACJM, Ayodhya. (ii) Case No.648 of 2019 U/S 498A I.P.C. pending before Additional Civil Judge/ (Sr. Div.)-II/ACJM, Ayodhya. (iii) Criminal Case No. 164 of 2022 U/S 128 Cr. P. C. filed before Family Court, Ayodhya (iv) Criminal Revision 682 of 2022 pending before Allahabad High Court, Lucknow. (v) Application U/S 482 No.5100 of 2021 pending before Allahabad High Court, Lucknow" 6. Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties as also the report of the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court 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 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 application is liable to be A482 No. 5100 of 2021 2 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 arising out of Complaint Case No.648 of 2019, quoted above, are hereby quashed qua the applicants in terms of settlement agreement. 7. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. September 10, 2025 Mohit Singh/- A482 No. 5100 of 2021 3 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench