HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15661 of 2023 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Virendra Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 and 3, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the records. 3. Although the name of Sri R.K.S. Chauhan is printed in the cause list but his vakalatnama is not on record. Office to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet about it. 4. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants Amar Chandra, Mangal, Virendra, Ram Pal, Smt. Muliya and Smt. Kausi with the prayers to allow this application and set aside the impugned order dated 18.03.2023 passed by Civil Judge, Junior Division/F.T.C. 2nd (Crime Against Women), Hamirpur as well as quashed the entire proceeding on the basis of compromise between both the parties in Case No. 1641 of 2006 (State Vs. Amar Chandra and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 57 of 2000, under Sections 147, 323, 352, 498-A IPC, P.S. Muskara, District Hamirpur, pending in the court of Civil Judge, Junior Division/FTC 2nd (Crime Against Women), Hamirpur and with a further prayer to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case, during the pendency of the present application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants states that an order was passed by this Court vide order dated 16.01.2025 directing the applicants to file the said compromise deed before the court concerned which was to be verified by the court concerned. In pursuance of the said order, the court concerned vide order dated 01.03.2025 verified the said compromise, copy of the same is on record. The same is not disputed by learned Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Singh Parmar, Virendra Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Hariom Singh, Rajesh Kumar Singh Chauhan Amar Chandra And 5 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) counsel for the opposite party nos.2 and 3. 6. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the said proposition. 7. 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. 8. 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 proceedings, charge sheet as well as cognizance/summoning order as prayed for by the applicant(s). 9. The present application is allowed. 10. The impugned order dated 18.03.2023 as well as the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed. October 9, 2025 M. ARIF A482 No. 15661 of 2023 2 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad