HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21719 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and Sri Ansar Ahmad, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA. 2. The present application has been filed to quash chargesheet dated 18.12.2013 along with cognizance order dated 18.07.2015 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.261 of 2015, arising out of Case Crime No.287A of 2013, under Sections 323, 147, 386 IPC, P.S. Ajeetmal, District Auraiya, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC/14th Finance Commissioner, Auraiya, on the basis of compromise. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified by learned court concerned on dated 30.07.2025 which has been appended with this petition, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for opposite party no.2. 4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error if the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise. 5. A three-Judge Bench of the 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sandhya Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ansar Ahmad, G.A. Bablu Alias Ranveer Singh And 6 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. 6. 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. 7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, chargesheet dated 18.12.2013 along with cognizance order dated 18.07.2015 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No.261 of 2015, arising out of Case Crime No.287A of 2013, under Sections 323, 147, 386 IPC, P.S. Ajeetmal, District Auraiya, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC/14th Finance Commissioner, Auraiya, are hereby quashed. 8. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed. 9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may seek recall of this order by way of filing recall application explaining the reasons. 10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today. October 28, 2025 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 21719 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad