Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44639 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5920 of 2025 Applicant :- Subedar Nishad And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Nayak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Nayak, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Abhay Kumar Singh, the learned State Counsel and Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, Advocate, who has filed his vakalatnama as well as short counter affidavit on behalf of the learned counsel for the 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 charge-sheet dated 25.08.2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 94 of 2023, under Sections 354D, 506, 376, 452 I.P.C., P.S. Maharuwa, District Ambedkar Nagar along with the entire proceedings of case titled as "State Vs. Subedar Nishad And Another" pending in the Court of Learned Additional Session Judge- Ist, Ambedkar Nagar, on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement. 4. The aforesaid case has been instituted on the basis of an F.I.R lodged by the opposite party no.2 on 28.06.2023, stating that after developing a friendly relationship, the applicant no.1 prepared an obscene video of the informant and by threatening to spread the video virally, he demanded Rs. 3 Lakhs from the informant. When the informant complained about it to the applicant no.2, who is brother of the applicant no.1, he also demanded money from the informant. 5. In the statement of the informant/victim recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C, she alleged commission of rape by the applicant no.1 at her residence and she further alleged that the applicant no.1 repetitively did so for two months and, thereafter, he posted the video on Instagram. 6. The medico legal examination of the victim did not revealed anything significant. As per ossification test, the age of victim has been opined to be 18-19 years. 7. In the statement of the informant/victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C, she reiterated her earlier version. 8. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge-sheet dated 25.08.2023 against the applicant no.1 for offences under section 376, 452, 506, 354 I.P.C and against the applicant no.2 for offence under Section 506 I.P.C. 9. The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that merely charges have been framed by the trial court, but no prosecution evidence has been led till date. Meanwhile, the parties have arrived at settlement, a copy whereof has been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant, wherein it is recorded that the opposite party no.1 and applicant no.1, both are adults, both had agreed to marry each other, but because of some misunderstandings, the informant had lodged the F.I.R. Now the informant has married some other person and she is living happily with her husband, and thus, she does not want any proceedings to continue against the applicants. 10. The learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has filed a short counter affidavit admitting the factum of compromise and supporting the prayer for quashing of the proceedings on the basis of compromise. 11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the F.I.R was lodged by the victim herself and the allegation of commission of rape was not there in it. Although, the opposite party no.2 alleged commission of rape in her statements, this allegation was not supported by the findings of medico legal examination report. The allegation of posting some obscene material on Social Media also could not be established during investigation. 12. Subsequently, the informant/victim has entered into a settlement, wherein she has stated that she had lodged the F.I.R due to some misunderstanding when her intention to marry the applicant no.1 could not materialized and after she has got married to some other person and she has no grievance left against the applicants. 13.The aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the continuance of the criminal proceedings against the applicants would not serve the interest of justice, accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the charge-sheet dated 25.08.2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 94 of 2023, under Sections 354D, 506, 376, 452 I.P.C., P.S. Maharuwa, District Ambedkar Nagar along with the entire proceedings of case titled as "State Vs. Subedar Nishad And Another" pending in the Court of Learned Additional Session Judge- Ist, Ambedkar Nagar, is hereby quashed. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Preeti. Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench