HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 26141 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J. 1. Heard Mr. Ganga Bhushan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., Mr. Ankit Sharma, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 09.12.2017 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 1919 of 2018 (State of U.P. Vs. Maharam and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 166 of 2017, under Sections 323, 325, 504 IPC, Police Station Barua Sagar, District Jhansi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite party no.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 07.11.2025, a direction was given to the court concerned to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the court concerned had verified the contents of compromise. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the court concerned vide order dated 03.12.2025. 5. In this regard, the court concerned i.e. learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Jhansi, has sent report dated 12.12.2025, along with verification order and verified compromise, which shows that both the parties appeared before the Court and verified the compromise. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ganga Bhushan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ankit Sharma, G.A. Maharam And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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 court below. 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 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 facts and considering that the parties do not wish to pursue the case any further, the dispute is essentially of a private nature and has no wider social impact. Since it has been mutually settled between the parties by way of a compromise, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding with the matter further. 9. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and impugned charge-sheet dated 09.12.2017 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 1919 of 2018 (State of U.P. Vs. Maharam and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 166 of 2017, under Sections 323, 325, 504 IPC, Police Station Barua Sagar, District Jhansi, are hereby quashed. April 23, 2026 Subham NA528 No. 26141 of 2025 2 (Sanjiv Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUBHAM KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad