HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9862 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Sri Divyani Mishra, Advocate, is present on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 by filing her Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record. 3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No.1563/2023 arising out Crime No. 781/2009, under section 279, 304A I.P.C, (corresponding sections- 281,106 B.N.S.) at Police Station- Atrauli, District Hardoi, passed by the court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Third Hardoi, and presently pending before the learned court of Shriman Nyayadhikari Gram Nyayalaya Tehsil-Sandila, District- Hardoi, as well as summoning order dated 11.12.2009 along with charge sheet dated 18.09.2009, on the basis of compromise between the parties contained as Annexure No.1 & 2, to this application in the interest of justice. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 07.10.2025 a direction was given to the trial court to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, learned trial court had verified the contents of compromise. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the trial court vide report dated 30.10.2025. 6. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the trial court. 7. Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. Hence, inherent power Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prabhu Sharan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shashi Kant @ Shashi Kant Shukla .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties. 8. In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter is purely of personal nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further. 9. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and the proceedings of Case No.1563/2023 arising out Crime No. 781/2009, under section 279, 304A I.P.C, (corresponding sections- 281,106 B.N.S.) at Police Station- Atrauli, District Hardoi, passed by the court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Third Hardoi, and presently pending before the learned court of Shriman Nyayadhikari Gram Nyayalaya Tehsil-Sandila, District- Hardoi, as well as summoning order dated 11.12.2009 along with charge sheet dated 18.09.2009, on the basis of compromise between the parties contained as Annexure No.1 & 2, to this, are hereby quashed. November 21, 2025 A.Nigam A482 No. 9862 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench