HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3699 of 2025 Court No. - 74 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. 1. During the course of hearing learned counsel for the applicants corrected the prayer clause. 2. The present application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 337 of 2022 (Munne Kha vs. Shami @ Sharukh and others) as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 18.7.2022 under Section 395 of I.P.C., P.S. Civil Lines, District Budaun, pending in the court of Special Judge (D.A.A.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Budaun, on the basis of compromise dated 24.5.2025. 3. Learned counsel for both the parties jointly submitted that the parties settled their private dispute for the offence punishable under Section 395 of I.P.C., by way of compromise dated 24.5.2025 which has been verified by the court concered on 24.5.2025 in pursuance of order of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 8.5.2025 in present application. Certified copy of verified compromise as well as verification proceedings of compromise are annexed as Annexure-SA-1 to SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit dated 13.7.2025. It is further submitted that private opposite party no. 2 is father- in-law of applicant no. 1. There was matrimonial dispute which has been decided on the basis of compromise and a divorce decree has already been passed by mutual consent.On being arrived at mutual consent, both the parties have come to terms and decided to settle their dispute, therefore, no useful purpose would be served to keep the matter alive and pending the present case be finally decided. 4. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 also submits that as the applicants and opposite party no. 2 have already arrived at amicable settlement on 24.5.2025, therefore, opposite party no. 2 is no more interested to pursue the case any more against the applicants. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chetan Chatterjee Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ran Vijay Singh Shami Alias Sharukh And 4 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Heard Sri Kavindra Dwivedi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Chetan Chatterjee, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Sri Rahul Pandey, learned brief holder for the State. 6. Brief facts of the case are that complaint dated 26.5.2022 with regard to the incident dated 23.4.2022 wherein it is alleged that complainant was going to his home from his car along with driver Israr and Firoz and on the way at about 4:15 pm Shami @ Shahrukh, his younger brother Arbaj and Hamid and Nizam came in Bolero Car No. UP21AV4755 armed with countrymade pistols. It is further mentioned that Shami @ Shahrukh and Arbaj committed robbery on the gun point of complainant with threat to kill him and looted his chain and Rs. 7,000/- and Hamid and Nizam looted watch of driver Israr, while Rahees looted Rs. 2500/- of Firoz on gun point. Thereafter when Firoz Kha, Driver Israr objected, aforesaid accused persons beaten complainant and his companions with kicks and waving the gun they fled away abusing complainant side. Accused persons threatened to kill the complainant, if they complain about this. 7. Present matter is related to offence under the aforementioned sections, both the parties entered into an amicable settlement, and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for the parties and has jointly submitted that in the interest of justice the proceedings may be quashed in the light of the compromise. 8. Keeping in mind, the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692 and Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinghbhai Karmur & Others v. State of Gujarat & another, (2017) 9 SCC 641 and facts, circumstances of the case, the present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. is allowed. 9. The entire proceedings relating to proceedings of Complaint Case No. 337 of 2022 (Munne Kha vs. Shami @ Sharukh and others) as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 18.7.2022 under Section 395 of I.P.C., P.S. Civil Lines, District Budaun, pending in the court of Special Judge (D.A.A.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Budaun, are hereby quashed. 10. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties and perusing the affidavit filed by the applicants. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said A482 No. 3699 of 2025 2 application. 11. The parties may file the certified copy of this order before the court concerned within four weeks from today. September 11, 2025 A.P. Pandey A482 No. 3699 of 2025 3 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad