Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38765 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5468 of 2025 Applicant :- Afzal Ahmad @ Afzal Warsi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suhail Kashif 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 Suhail Kashif, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashok Srivastava, the learned A.G.A for the State and Sri Rajesh Kumar, the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 3. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the applicant has sought quashing of the charge sheet dated 22.01.2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 262 of 2019, under Section 376 I.P.C, Police Station Dewa, District Barabanki as well as the cognizance order dated 29.02.2020 along with the entire proceedings of Case No. 4076 of 2020, which is pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.17, District Barabanki, on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement. 4. A copy of the compromise deed dated 25.06.2025 has been annexed with the application, wherein it has been stated that the opposite party no.2 had lodged an F.I.R due to instigation of some neighbors. Subsequently, due to mediation by some respected person, the parties have arrived at a settlement and the opposite party no.2 does not want any proceedings to continue in furtherance of the F.I.R lodged by him. 5. It is relevant to note that there was no finding recorded during medico legal examination of the opposite party no.2 which may support the allegation of commission of rape and this allegation was also not supported by the findings of the pathological examination report. 6. The learned counsel for the opposite parties have jointly stated that since the trial court took cognizance of the offence, no proceedings has taken place in the trial court and the parties have arrived at a settlement before inception of the trial. 7. 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. 8. 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." 6. 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 proceedings of Case No. 4076 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 262 of 2019 under Section 376 I.P.C, Police Station Dewa, District Barabanki, is hereby quashed. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Preeti. Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench