Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37112 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5389 of 2025 Applicant :- Imran Begh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jhanak Bhawnani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Ms. Jhanak Bhawnani, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Manish Vikram Singh Chauhan, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Mohd. Masood Raza, the learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and perused the record. 2. Counter affidavit filed by Sri Mohd. Masood Raza, the learned counsel for opposite party No.2 is taken on record. 3. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought quashing of the summoning/cognizance order dated 01.02.2022 in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 298/2020 under Sections 323, 308, 504, 506 of IPC passed by Learned Special Judge PC Act, VII, Lucknow as well as the summoning order dated 15.09.2022 and the charge-sheet dated 14.12.2020 arising out of the aforesaid F.I.R under sections 323, 504, 506 of IPC passed by Learned Juvenile Justice Board, Lucknow. 4. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the parties have settled their dispute amicably outside the Court and they have arrived at a compromise. Compromise deed dated 26.05.2025 has been placed on record in the application itself. The parties have confirmed the terms of compromise. 5. Opposite party No.2 does not have any objection, if the impugned proceedings are quashed against the applicants. 6. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. 7. Considering the fact that the dispute between the parties is personal in nature and ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus Station of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466, it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility. 8. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the present application is allowed and proceedings of the aforementioned cases are quashed. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 1.7.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench