HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7827 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. 1. Sri Sandeep Kumar, Advocate has put in appearance by filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 and the same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Sandeep Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the material placed on record. 3. By means of the instant application, the applicants have prayed to quash the cognizance and summoning order dated 20.07.2024 as well as quash the chargesheet dated 19.07.2023 filed u/s 406, 420, 504 and 506 of IPC relating case crime no. 267 of 2023 u/s 406, 420, 504 and 506 IPC P.S. Lonar District Hardoi. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that due to certain misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. was lodged against the applicants. He added that later on, the parties sat together and have amicably settled their disputes, which has been reduced in writing on 09.09.2024. Thereafter, the applicants filed an Application U/S 482 No.679 of 2025 wherein this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 has directed the court below to verify the compromise deed and in compliance thereof, the compromise deed was prepared on 01.03.2025 and was produced before the trial court. He submits that now there is no dispute in between the parties and they have settled their dispute. He submits that further criminal proceedings in the instant matter would amount to harassment and, thus, the instant criminal proceedings Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Krishna Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sateesh Kumar @ Satish Verma And Another .....Applicant(s) The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) against the applicants may be quashed. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the opposite party no.2 has no grievance, hence, criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped. 6. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the submissions aforesaid. 7. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on 09.09.2024 and said compromise has been verified on 01.03.2025 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned criminal proceedings against the applicants. 8. In view of the above, as the applicants and opposite parties have entered into compromise on 09.09.2024 and no grievance remains to be agitated and, as such, further criminal proceedings in the aforementioned criminal case are liable to be set aside in view of the Judgments of the Apex Court rendered in B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008) 9 SCC 677; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466. 9. Accordingly, entire criminal proceedings against the applicants in the cognizance and summoning order dated 20.07.2024 as well as quash the chargesheet dated 19.07.2023 filed u/s 406, 420, 504 and 506 of IPC arising out of case crime no. 267 of 2023 u/s 406, 420, 504 and 506 IPC P.S. Lonar District Hardoi, are hereby quashed. 10. The application is allowed accordingly. 11. Consigned to the records. September 16, 2025 Mayank A482 No. 7827 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench