HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7990 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, as well as Shri Vinay Kumar, Advocate, who has put in appearance by way of filing his Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2, and perused the record. The Vakalatnama is taken on record. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No.43303/2024 (State Vs. Israil Azaz & Ors.), pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate- IIIrd, Lucknow, arising out of FIR No.0041/2024, under Sections 323, 504 and 307 IPC lodged at Police Station Alambagh, District Lucknow on the ground that the parties have arrived at a compromise/settlement. 3. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have settled their dispute amicably outside the Court and they have arrived at a compromise. The compromise entered into between the parties has been placed on record as Annexure-5 to the application. The parties have confirmed the terms of the compromise. The compromise has been verified between the parties by learned Judicial Magistrate-IIIrd, Lucknow vide order dated 28.05.2025 in compliance of the order dated 07.03.2025 passed by this Court in an Application No.2133/2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the injuries alleged to have been caused are simple in nature, as opined by the doctor and, therefore, the case of the applicants is squarely covered under para-15.4 of the judgment rendered in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Others, reported in (2019) 5 Supreme Court Cases, 688, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Srivastava, Satendra Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Abdul Samad Khan And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) which is extracted herein below: "15.4 Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove." 5. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. 6. 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 proceedings in pursuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility. 7. 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 instant application is allowed and the entire proceedings entire proceedings of Case No.43303/2024 (State Vs. Israil Azaz & Ors.), pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate- IIIrd, Lucknow, arising out of FIR No.0041/2024, under Sections 323, 504 A482 No. 7990 of 2025 2 and 307 IPC lodged at Police Station Alambagh, District Lucknow, are hereby quashed. 8. The compromise deed shall be made part of this order. 9. Consign to record. (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) September 22, 2025 MVS/- A482 No. 7990 of 2025 3 Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench