Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30355 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4528 of 2025 Applicant :- Samaluddin And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Maohammd Nadeem Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ashish Kumar,G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohammad Nadeem, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Sudhir Kumar Chandraul, learned AGA for the State and Sri Ashish Kumar for opposite party No. 2. 2. The applicants herein, on the earlier occasion, preferred application U/s 482 No. 9818 of 2024 in whcih the following orders were passed:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashish Kumar, counsel for the opposite no. 2 and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 23.02.2016 as well as the cognizance/summoning order dated 16.02.2018 and the entire proceeding of Case No. 201 of 2018 (State vs. Samaluddin and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 775 of 2015, under Sections 323, 504, 308 I.P.C., Police Station- Gursahaiganj, District- Kannauj, pursuant to compromise deed dated 22.02.2024. 3. Counsel for the applicants submits that the matter arises out of matrimonial discord. The applicant no. 1 is the father-in-law of the opposite party no. 2. The applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4 are the close relatives of the applicant no. 1. In the alleged incident, the opposite party no. 2/informant received injuries. The injuries claimed are not serious in nature. Further, during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of compromise deed dated 22.02.2024 has been annexed as Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit wherein it has been mentioned that opposite party no.2 does not want to press the case. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the court concerned and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of process of law. 4. Counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the submissions advanced by the counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that he has no objection if the proceedings are quashed. 5. Learned A.G.A., however, submits that it is the concerned court concerned , which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicants may approach the concerned court concerned and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law. 6. In view of above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court concerned along with compromise deed as well certified copy of this order within three weeks from today. It is expected that court concerned may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of the parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the Court concerned shall also record the statements of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not. 7. The Court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. 8. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. 9. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of." 3. There happens to be an order of the Session Case No. 858 of 2024 that since the offences are non-compoundable, thus, they cannot be compounded though the order speaks out that the parties had entered into compromise and the same stood verified. 4. Prayer in the present application is for quashing of the proceedings of Case No. 201 of 2018 (State Vs. Samaluddin and others), under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, P.S. Gursahaiganj, District Kannauj arising out of Case Crime No. 775 of 2015. 5. Learned AGA submits that, in case, the parties have entered into compromise and the same stood verified then the proceedings be quashed. 6. Thus, this Court finds that there is no reason to proceed with the matter. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. The proceedings of Case No. 201 of 2018 (State Vs. Samaluddin and others), under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, P.S. Gursahaiganj, District Kannauj arising out of Case Crime No. 775 of 2015 be quashed. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Rajesh Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad