Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137947 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6825 of 2025 Applicant :- Jayant Jayraj And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- Himanshu Kashyap,G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present 482 Cr.P.C./ 528 B.N.S.S. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 30.11.2023, cognizance/summoning order dated 19.02.2024 as well as the entire proceeding of Case No. nil of 2024 (State vs. Jayant Jayraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No 307 of 2023, under Sections 323, 325, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Mogarra, District- Mathura, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First, Mathura on the basis of compromise dated 29.01.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court and entered into a compromise. Injuries are simple in nature. Offence under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC are compoundable offence. Applicants approached this Hon'ble Court by filing this 482 application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 03.03.2025 passed following order:- "Shri Himanshu Kashyap, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party No. 2, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for both the parties jointly submitted that parties settled their dispute with regard to offence punishable under Sections 323, 325, 452, 504, 506 of I.P.C. on the basis of compromise dated 29.1.2025. Certified copy of the compromise is on record as Annexure-5 to the affidavit. Both the parties are directed to appear before the court concerned within six weeks from today for verification. Court concerned is directed to verify the same. Applicants are directed to file supplementary affidavit annexing therewith certified copy of the verified compromise as well as verification proceedings. Put up this case as fresh on 18.6.2025 showing the name of Shri Himanshu Kashyap as counsel for the opposite party No. 2. Till the next date of listing, further proceedings of Case No. Nil of 2024 (State Vs. Jayant Jayraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 307 of 2023, under Sections 323, 325, 452, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Mogarra, District Mathura, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First, Mathura shall remain stayed against the applicants. " 5. In pursuance of order of this Court dated 03.03.2025, the Trial court vide order dated 17.04.2025 verified the parties as well as compromise application through their counsels. Verification report/order has been filed by learned counsel for the applicants along with supplementary affidavit. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their private and civil dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed. 7. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further. 8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non- compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case. 10. Accordingly, the impugned charge-sheet dated 30.11.2023, cognizance/summoning order dated 19.02.2024 as well as the entire proceeding of Case No. nil of 2024 (State vs. Jayant Jayraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No 307 of 2023, under Sections 323, 325, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Mogarra, District- Mathura, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First, Mathura, are hereby quashed. 11. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./ 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 Aditya Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad