Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38687 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5427 of 2025 Applicant :- Deepu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Shukla,Vivek Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. A short counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Ashish Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Sinha, the learned A.G.A for the State and Sri Gaurav Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri O.P. Tiwari, the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. 3. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the applicant has sought quashing of the chargesheet No. 143/2021 dated 05.06.2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 101 of 2021 under Section 363, 366, 376 I.P.C, Police Station Gagaghat, District Unnao as well as the summoning order dated 21.06.2021 along with the entire proceedings of Case No. 673 of 2021 titled as "State Vs. Deepu", pending in the Court of Additional District and and Session Judge, Court No.11/Special Judge, POCSO Act, District Unnao, on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement. 4. A copy of the compromise deed dated 28.06.2025 has been annexed with the application, wherein it has been stated that the opposite party no.2 has married the applicant out of her own free will on 08.04.2024 and a son was born out of their wedlock on 10.03.2025. She is living happily with the applicant and she does not want any proceedings to continue in furtherance of the F.I.R lodged by her. 5. The learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed a short counter affidavit accepting the compromise and supporting the prayer for quashing of the proceedings on the ground of compromise. 6. In the case of Bahori Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. and Another 2024 SCC OnLine All 4596, this Court has examined the scope and ambit of Section 482 Cr.P.C as enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Daxaben v. The State of Gujarat 2022 SCC OnLine SC 936, P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 4 SCC 578, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641, P. Dharamaraj v. Shanmugam, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1186, State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, Ramgopal v. State of M.P., (2022) 14 SCC 531, Ramawatar v. State of M.P., (2022) 13 SCC 635 and Kapil Gupta v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1030 and has culled out the following principles from the aforesaid judgments: "27. ....... the inherent powers of the High Courts recognized by Section 482 Cr. P.C. are wide and can take care of almost all the situations where interference by the High Court becomes necessary for any other reason amounting to oppression or harassment in any trial, inquiry or proceedings, but the power has to be exercised judiciously and consciously. The High Courts can exercise their jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of first information report and investigation, and terminating criminal proceedings if the case of abuse of process of law is clearly made out. Such powers ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind the nature and effect of the offence on the conscience of the society; the seriousness of the injury,if any, the voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim, the conduct of the accused persons and the other relevant considerations. Though the Courts should be slow in quashing the proceedings wherein heinous and serious offences are involved, the High Court is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there is sufficient evidence which may lead to proving the charges. The High Court can quash the proceedings even in cases where the parties have entered into a settlement after conviction for a heinous offence carrying a maximum punishment for life. The touchstone for exercising the extraordinary power under Section 482 Cr. P.C. would be to secure the ends of justice. There can be no hard and fast rule restricting the powers of the High Court to do substantial justice, as a restrictive construction of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C. may lead to grave injustice." 7. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bahori Lal (Supra), the present application is allowed and the chargesheet No. 143/2021 dated 05.06.2021 as well as the summoning order dated 21.06.2021 along with the entire proceedings of Case No. 673 of 2021 are hereby quashed. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Preeti. Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench