Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40745 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5596 of 2025 Applicant :- Ashok Pathak Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lalla Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Shri Lalla Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Mayank Sinha, learned AGA for the State; and Shri Ashish Pandey, advocate, who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of Opposite Party No. 2. 2. By means of the instant application filed under section 528, BNSS, the applicant has sought quashing of the summoning order dated 23/05/2017 passed by learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (CBI) A/P, Lucknow on the charge-sheet in Case Crime No. 414/2016, under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 307 IPC & Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1932, Police Station Wajirganj, District Lucknow and the charge-sheet with consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid case crime number, on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement. The aforesaid case was instituted on the basis of an FIR lodged on 30/06/2016 against three named persons including the applicant and five-six other persons, stating that his father had entered into an altercation with some person in the country liquor shop at about 9 PM on 30/06/2016 and that person had slapped the informant's father. The informant went to the spot and intervened, and those persons went away in a black SUV. After some time, they returned and started beating the informant's father. One of the persons put a revolver at the temple of the informant. His father hit, and the revolver got shifted from his temple. That person fired a shot, but the informant was saved. Some persons gathered, and the applicant was caught on the spot. 3. After investigation, the investigating officer submitted a charge sheet against the applicant alone, and it appears that the FIR regarding involvement of other persons in the incident could not be established during investigation. The trial court took cognizance of the offense by means of the order dated 25/03/2017, and the trial is still continuing. 4. During pendency of the trial, the parties have entered into a compromise dated 26/09/2024, wherein it is stated that Opposite Party Number two had not received any injury in the incident, and he had lodged the FIR being misled by some persons. Subsequently, the parties have entered into a settlement. The compromise has been verified by means of order dated 08/11/2024, passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act, Lucknow. 5. Shri Ashish Pandey, the learned counsel for Opposite Party No.2, has also supported the prayer for quashing of the proceedings. 6. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in light of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Mohd Ibrahim vs State of UP (2022) SCC OnLine All 106, what comes to light is that, although the FIR alleges involvement of other persons in the commission of the offense, and firing a shot by the appellant, involvement of any other person could not be established during investigation, and even as per the FIR, no person received injury in the incident; subsequently, the parties have entered into a compromise, I find it appropriate to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility. 7. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute by way of a compromise arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by this Court in the case of Mohd Ibrahim (supra), the present application is allowed and the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 414/2016, under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 307 IPC & Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1932, Police Station Wajirganj, District Lucknow, are hereby quashed. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 (Manoj K.) Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench