Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2462 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7981 of 2024 Applicant :- Rahul Dubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajit Ranjan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short "BNSS") has been filed for the following main relief(s):- "(i) Set aside the entire proceeding of Charge Sheet no.01/2022 dated 29.05.2022 Case Crime no.0164/2022 U/s-504, 307 IPC & 30 Arms Act 1959 at P.S- Krishna Nagar, District- Lucknow, Styled as State.....Vs.. Rahul Dubey & others pending before Learned Court of ACJM VII Lucknow and Summoning order dated 20.03.2023. A true certified copy of charge sheet dated. 29.05.2022 & Summoning order dated 20.03.2023 collectively annexed herewith as Annexure No.1 to this application." 3. It is stated that on 10.04.2022, the date of incident indicated in the FIR lodged by opposite party no.2 bearing FIR No.0164 dated 10.04.2022, under Sections 504, 307 I.P.C. the applicant fired on the opposite party no.2-informant, which is not correct. In fact about 30-45 monkeys attacked on the applicant, who was Security Guard having its licensed gun, on which the applicant fired in his self defence and this fact can be deduced from the injury report dated 11.04.2022 of the applicant, annexed as Annexure No.4 to the application. 4. It is further stated that injury in the alleged incident was not sustained by the opposite party no.2 and this fact is also evident from the injury report of opposite party no.2, annexed as Annexure No.5 and in this view of the matter, it can be deduced that the FIR in issue, the basis of the pending criminal proceedings, was lodged by the informant-opposite party no.2 in some wrong impression. 5. It is also stated that on coming to know about the aforesaid facts the informant/opposite party no.2 and applicant came to a settlement and according to said settlement the informant/opposite party no.2 does not want to continue with the case. 6. It is also stated from the aforesaid, neither a case under Section 307 is made out against the applicant nor offence under Section 504 I.P.C. would be attracted as the specific utterance has not been indicated by the opposite party no.2 either in the FIR or in the statement made before the concerned court. 7. It is further stated that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and have entered into a compromise and a copy of compromise deed, duly signed by the parties, is annexed as Annexure No.7 to the present application. As such, keeping in view the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in this regard, the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed. 8. Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the Trial Court as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court. 9. Considering the aforesaid, this application is disposed of finally in following terms:- (i) The parties to the proceedings in issue shall appear and file the compromise before the concerned Court within four week's from today. (ii) If the parties appear before the concerned Court in terms of above, the concerned Court shall proceed to verify the compromise between the parties to the proceedings and prepare a report to the same effect and the original compromise deed be made part of record. (iii) The concerned Court shall conclude the process of verification of compromise within two week's from the date of production of copy of this order. (iv) The concerned Court shall permit the parties to the proceedings to obtain the certified copy of the report as well as compromise deed. (v) It shall be open to the applicant(s) to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. (vi) Office is directed to provide original compromise, if any, to the counsel for the applicant(s), after retaining its photocopy on record. It is for the purposes for its verification by the concerned Court. (vii) For a period of eight weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case. Order Date :- 15.1.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench