HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 29732 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicants, Sri Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State. 2. Present application has been preferred with a prayer to quash entire proceeding of Case no. 977 of 2012 (State vs. Ramyagya and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 260 of 2011 under sections 419, 420, 467, 471, 504 IPC at Police Station Handia, District Allahabad/Prayagraj as well as charge sheet dated 19.4.2012 and cognizance order dated 18.6.2012 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad in light of compromise arrived in between parties on 29.7.2025 pending in court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 8th, Allahabad. 3. In compliance of earlier order dated 14.8.2025 passed by this Court, compromise verification report has already been received from learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 8, Prayagraj and the same is appended to order sheet wherein it is mentioned that compromise has been verified on dated 6.9.2025 in presence of both the parties. 4. Sri Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State showed no objection to aforesaid contention of learned counsel for applicant. 5. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Lal Mani Singh, Praveen Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rampati Pal And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) no harm and error and it would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire proceeding of Case no. 977 of 2012 (State vs. Ramyagya and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 260 of 2011 under sections 419, 420, 467, 471, 504 IPC at Police Station Handia, District Allahabad/Prayagraj, are hereby quashed, only in respect of applicants namely Rampati Pal and Lallu Pal. 9. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed. 10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within three weeks from today. 11. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that he/she has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he/she may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application. October 28, 2025 Shaswat NA528 No. 29732 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad