Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:43104 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6629 of 2025 Applicant :- Vipin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Nadeem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Nadeem, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.P. Singh learned State Law Officer and Sri Mohd Sabauddin Ansari, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2. 2.Though the Vakalatnama is not on record but case status shows that Sri Mohd Sabauddin Ansari has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2. 3. This application U/s 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 22 of 2023 (Anil Kumar vs. Vipin) under Section 377/511 IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Baniya Ther, District Sambhal pending in the court of Special Judge, POCSO Act/ Additional Session Judge, Sambhal at Chandausi. 4. The applicant herein had earlier approached this Court while filing application U/s 482 No. 28281 of 2024 in which on 11.12.2024, the following order was passed: "1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Maohammd Nadeem, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present application has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.22 of 2023 (Anil Kumar Vs. Vipin), under Section 377/511 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Baniya Ther, District Sambhal, pending in the court of Special Judge, POCSO Act/ Additional Session Judge, Sambhal at Chandausi, on the basis of compromise. 4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the impugned complaint was filed on the allegations which were incorrect as there was simply altercation between the applicant and opposite party no.2. It is further submitted that the victim was not medically examined. It is also submitted that now the parties have settled their dispute amicably and a written compromise dated 30.07.2024 has also entered into between the parties. It is further submitted that on the basis of aforesaid compromise, the impugned proceedings may be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the compromise between the parties yet to be verified by the court below, therefore, proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of aforesaid compromise. 6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and taking into account the statement of victim, present application is disposed of with direction that the applicant will file original deed of compromise before the court below within a period of 15 days from today. In case, such compromise deed is filed, the court below will verify the same after summoning the parties and after verification of the aforesaid compromise, the court below will permit the parties to obtain certified copy of the same. 7. The aforesaid exercise of verification shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receiving of certified copy of this order and for a period of two months no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case. 8. It is further provided that the parties are at liberty to file a fresh application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the impugned proceeding on the basis of verified copy of compromise. 9. With the aforesaid direction, the application is disposed of." 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited attention towards annexure 12 at page-23 being a certified copy of the order dated 09.01.2025 passed in criminal complaint case no. 22 of 2023 (Anil Kumar vs. Vipin Kumar) wherein a compromise so entered into between the parties stood verified. Relevant assertion in this regard has been made in paragraph no. 4 of the application. 6. Learned AGA as well as the counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 does not dispute the fact, according to him compromise stands entered and verified. 7. Accordingly, there is no reason to further continue with the present proceedings. Resultant, the application is allowed. 8. The proceedings of Complaint Case No. 22 of 2023, (Anil Kumar vs. Vipin Kumar), under Sections 377/511 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Baniya Then, District Sambhal pending in the court of Special Judge, POCSO Act/ Additional Session Judge, Sambhal at Chandausi, is quashed in so far it pertains to appellant. Order Date :- 24.3.2025 /C. MANI (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad