Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5774 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6415 of 2023 Applicant :- Lavkush Singh @ Lavkush Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Nigam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ankit Tiwari,Shailender Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record. 2. The present application has been filed with the following prayer:- "To quash the Charge-Sheet dated 04.05.2021 filed by the Investigating Officer in FIR No./Case Crime No. 0557/2020, U/S-406/ 419/ 420/ 504/ 506 I.P.C. Police Station- Amethi, District- Amethi, against the petitioner." 3. It appears that on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide its order dated 10.07.2023 referred the matter to Mediation Centre of this Court so as to carve out possibility of amicable settlement of dispute between the parties. 4. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT before Mediation Centre of this Court between applicant and opposite party No. 2/ Vishnu Prakash Pushpjivi indicates that on 20.12.2023, the parties have settled the dispute amicably and entered into an agreement voluntarily and their signatures have been verified by their respective counsels. Settlement agreement is annexed as Annexure- D and is reproduced hereinunder:- "11. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:- A) That both the Parties had mutually agreed that First Party shall pay an amount of Rs. 2,38000/- (Rupees Two Lacs Thity Eight thousand only) to Second party towards the entire claim of the Second party from the First Party. B) That towards the payment of aforesaid agreed amount the First Party had handed over Two demand drafts today. i) Draft No.756550 amounting to Rupees 1,38,000/-(One Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand only) of State Bank Of India, Chilbila payable at New Delhi dated 12.12.2023. ii) Draft no. 756542 amounting to Rupees 1,00,000/- (One Lakh) of State Bank Of India, Chilbila payable at New Delhi dated 29.11.2023. C) That it is also agreed between the parties that neither they themselves nor any member of their respective families shall institute any case in the form of criminal or civil proceedings against each other, or any of their relative or family members, in future in respect to the present dispute or any matter incidental thereto and if any proceeding has already been initiated the same would be get disposed of in terms of this settlement Agreement. D) That both the parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Settlement in strict sense and they have agreed to co-operate to each other to withdraw their respective cases. In case of any default, the party committing default shall be liable for playing fraud with the Court, hence for contempt of the Court." 5. 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 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 allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and hence no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. 6. Accordingly, present application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings arising out of F.I.R./ Case Crime No. 0557/2020, indicated above, are hereby quashed qua the applicant 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. Order Date :- 28.1.2025 G. Singh/ Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench