Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44517 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6254 of 2025 Applicant :- Gafoor And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jalaj Kumar Gupta,Mohd. Khalid Amin Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Jalaj Kumar Gupta, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Nagarjun Pandey, the learned State Counsel and Sri Mehndi Khan, Advocate, who has filed his vakalatnama as well as the short counter affidavit on behalf of the learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2,3,4 and 5, is taken on record. 2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the applicants have sought quashing of the charge-sheet dated 27.08.2019 arising out of Case Crime No.232 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Phoolbehad, District Lakhimpur Kheri as well as summoning order dated 18.10.2019 along with the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 88 of 2023 pending in the Court of Learned Additional Session Judge- Ist, Lakhimpur Kheri, on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement. 3. The aforesaid case has been instituted on the basis of an F.I.R lodged by the opposite party no.2 on 04.05.2019, stating that all the accused persons had assaulted some persons from his side. 4. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge-sheet dated 27.08.2014 and the trial court has taken cognizance on 18.10.2019 and summoned the applicants to face the trial. The trial court has recorded statements of five prosecution witnesses and all of them have turned hostile. 5. Meanwhile, the parties have entered into a compromise on 29.07.2025, stating that a large crowd had gathered at the time of the incident and the informant could not know as to who were the assailants. The informant and the victims have collectively stated that they have resolved their disputes amicably and they do not want any proceedings to continue against the applicants. 6. Although the F.I.R and the charge-sheet mentions a Section 307 I.P.C., none of the prosecution witnesses have supported the allegations in their statements recorded before the trial court and all of them have turned hostile and in the compromise, it has been stated that a large crowd had gathered at the time of the incident and the informant and the victims did not know as to who had caused the incident and they have resolved their disputes. 7. The learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 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. 8. Considering the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus Station of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466, it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility. 9. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the present petition is allowed and the chargesheet dated 27.08.2019 arising out of Case Crime No.232 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Phoolbehad, District Lakhimpur Kheri as well as summoning order dated 18.10.2019 along with the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 88 of 2023 are hereby quashed. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Preeti. Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench