HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8242 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. Sri Rajendra Prasad Lodhi, Advocate has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite parties nos. 2 and 3, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra Prasad Lodhi, learned counsel appearing for opposite parties nos. 2 and 3, llearned AGA for the State as well as perused the material placed on record. By means of the instant application, the applicant has have prayed for quashing of the chargesheet dated 26.04.1992 in Case No. 2209/99/1992; State Vs. Khustar @ Guddu, arising out of Case Crime No. 223 of 1991, under Section 381 of IPC, Police Station Utraula, District Balramapur and summoning order dated 10.07.1992 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Utraula, District Balrampur as well as entire proceedings in pursuance thereof, on the basis of compromise dated 27.07.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that due to certain misunderstanding, the instant FIR was lodged against the applicant. He added that later on, the parties sat together and have amicably settled their disputes, which has been reduced in writing. Thereafter, the applicant filed an Application U/s 482 No. 6390 of 2025, wherein this Court vide order dated 05.08.2025 had directed the court below to verify the said compromise deed and in compliance thereof, the compromise deed was verified on 29.08.2025. 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 against the applicants may be quashed. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajey Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajendra Prasad Lodhi Sayyed Khushtar Jafri @ Guddu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Learned counsel appearing for opposite parties nos. 2 and 3 has also supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the opposite parties nos. 2 and 3 have no grievance, hence, criminal proceedings against the applicant may be dropped. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the submissions aforesaid. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on 27.07.2025 and said compromise has been verified on 29.08.2025 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned criminal proceedings against the applicant. In view of the above, as the applicant and opposite parties have entered into compromise on 27.07.2025 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. Resultantly, the proceedings of Case No. 2209/99/1992; State Vs. Khustar @ Guddu, arising out of Case Crime No. 223 of 1991, under Section 381 of IPC, Police Station Utraula, District Balramapur, are hereby quashed. The compromise deed shall be part of this order. Consequences to be followed. The application is allowed accordingly. September 24, 2025 kkv/ A482 No. 8242 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench