Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35413 Court No. - 11 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4970 of 2025 Applicant :- Chintamani Pandey And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar,Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Rajesh Kumar, Advocate on behalf of the opposite party Nos. 2 & 3 is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 & 3 and perused the record. 3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of S.T. No.461 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No.256 of 2015, State vs. Chaintamani Pandey and another under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452 and 506 I.P.C. Police Station Madiaon, District Lucknow as well as impugned cognizance order and summoning order dated 18.08.2015 passed by learned ADJ-6th, District Lucknow. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 06.03.2025 a direction was given to the court concerned to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, learned court concerned had verified the contents of compromise. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 & 3 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the court concerned vide report/order dated 05.04.2025 6. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court concerned. 7. Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties. 8. In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter is purely of personal nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further. 9. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and proceedings of S.T. No.461 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No.256 of 2015, State vs. Chaintamani Pandey and another under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452 and 506 I.P.C. Police Station Madiaon, District Lucknow as well as impugned cognizance order and summoning order dated 18.08.2015 passed by learned ADJ-6th, District Lucknow are hereby quashed. 10. Office is directed to communicate this order to learned trial Court, forthwith. Order Date :- 12.6.2025 Reena/- (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench