Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44228 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6186 of 2025 Applicant :- Aftab Alam And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anamika Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Ms. Anamika Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Manish Kumar Pandey, learned AGA for the State as well as Sri Paritosh Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and perused the record. 2. By means of instant application under Section 482 CrPC, applicants have sought quashing of proceedings of Case Crime No. 08 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act, P.S.-Fatanpur, District-Pratapgarh and the Charge sheet dated 14.03.2021 including summoning order dated 05.03.2024, on the ground that parties have arrived at settlement. 3. The aforesaid case was instituted on the basis of FIR lodged by the opposite party No.2 on 09.01.2021 against eight persons, including the applicants, stating that the informant had gone to do some labour work alongwith some other persons near Madarsa situated in the village at about 09:00 AM on 02.01.2021 when the accused persons restrained him from digging a foundation and they hurled caste based abuses and beaten them up. The FIR states that the informant and other two labours had suffered injuries in the incident but they were not medically examined. 4. After investigation, Investigating Officer has submitted a charge sheet dated 14.03.2021 against the applicants and the similar allegations levelled against three accused persons could not be established. 5. During pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at settlement dated 24.07.2025 stating that the parties are residents of the same locality and the opposite party No.2 had lodged the FIR under influence of some local people due to certain differences. However, now the parties have amicably settled their disputes and opposite party No.2 does not want any proceedings to continue against the applicants. 6. The opposite party No.2 has filed a short counter affidavit accepting the terms of compromise and supporting the prayer for quashing of proceedings. 7. In the case of Ramawatar v. State of M.P., (2022) 13 SCC 635 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows: 17. ........where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a "special statute" would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482CrPC." 8. When this Court examined the facts of the present case in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ramawatar (supra), it appears that the incident took place on 02.01.2021 as the FIR was lodged on 09.01.2021; the FIR itself states that no person was medically examined and therefore, there is no medical evidence to support the allegations; the FIR states that the dispute occurred when the foundation was being dug and the accused persons resisted it, from which it appears that there was some dispute regarding property where foundation was being dug; as per statement made by the learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 even charges have not been framed by the trial Court till date and meanwhile parties have amicably settled their disputes, I am of the view that the continuance of criminal proceedings against the applicants could not served the interest of justice. 9. 9. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the present petition is allowed and proceedings of Case Crime No. 08 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act, P.S.-Fatanpur, District-Pratapgarh and the Charge sheet dated 14.03.2021 including summoning order dated 05.03.2024, are hereby quashed. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 30.7.2025 Vinay/- Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench