HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22502 of 2024 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Suraj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Girish Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. 3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 7.1.2022 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), FTC, Court No. 1, Varanasi as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 9247 of 2021, under Sections 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, P.S.- Sarnath, District Varanasi, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Varanasi. It is further prayed to stay the effect and operation of the impugned summoning order as well as further proceeding of the said case during pendency of this application. 4. The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 12.11.2024 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably. 5. As per report of Mediation Centre dated 17.4.2025 the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them in view of the settlement agreement. 6. As per the office report dated 09.7.2025 a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record which states that mediation between the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Suraj Kumar Singh, Arvind Kumar Singh, Kumar Ankit Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Girish Kumar Gupta, G.A. Ashutosh Ojha .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) parties is successful. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has paid the remaining amount to the opposite party no. 2 and now the entire amount has been paid to him and there is no due on him and therefore the impugned proceedings as well as summoning order be quashed. 8. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the said fact and submits that in compliance of the settlement agreement dated 17.4.2025 entered between the applicant and the opposite party no. 2 before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court the entire amount has been received by the opposite party no. 2. 9. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed. 10. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the impugned proceedings and summoning order as prayed for by the applicant(s). 11. The present application is allowed. 12. The impugned proceedings and the summoning order as prayed for by the applicant are hereby quashed. October 30, 2025 Naresh A482 No. 22502 of 2024 2 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad