HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42435 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1.Supplementary affidavit preferred on behalf of applicants is taken on record. 2. Heard Mohd. Danish, learned counsel for applicants, Sri Bharat Garg, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State. 3. Present application has been preferred with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case no. 13598/9 of 2024 (State vs. Sagar Kumar Saini and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 1014 of 2024 under sections 115(2) and 351(2) BNS, PS-Civil Lines, District Moradabad, charge sheet dated 27.11.2024 and cognizance order dated 17.12.2024 on the basis of compromise. 4. In compliance of earlier order dated 28.11.2025 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court, compromise verification report has already been received from learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moradabad and the same has been preferred today by learned counsel for applicants by way of supplementary affidavit which is taken on record, wherein it is mentioned that compromise has been verified on dated 9.1.2026 in presence of both the parties. 5. Sri Bharat Garg, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State showed no objection to aforesaid contention of learned counsel for applicants. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohammad Danish Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Bharat Garg, G.A. Sagar Kumar Saini And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 6. From perusal of records, it transpires that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for the parties and it has been submitted that there would be no harm and error and it would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise. 7. A three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. 8. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties. 9. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire proceeding of Case no. 13598/9 of 2024 (State vs. Sagar Kumar Saini and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 1014 of 2024 under sections 115(2) and 351(2) BNS, PS-Civil Lines, District Moradabad, are hereby quashed, only in respect of applicants herein. 10. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed. March 19, 2026 Shaswat NA528 No. 42435 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad