HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 17350 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Tej Om Prakash Gupta, learned Counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record. 3. The instant application has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No.1551 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.37 of 2022, under Sections 307 and 323 I.P.C., Police Station Basai Mohammadpur, District Firozabad as well as charge-sheet dated 23.04.2022. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicants as well as opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 07.01.2026 a direction was given to the Trial Court to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the parties have verified the compromise as informed by the Trial Court vide report dated 13.02.2026. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the Trial Court vide report dated 13.02.2026. 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. This matter pertains to offences under Sections 307 and 323 of the IPC. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Atul Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Naveen Singh, Tej Om Prakash Gupta Rajneesh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) As per the prosecution case, the applicant attacked the first informant with the intention to kill by assaulting him with a Gandasa (sickle), though the informant escaped unhurt. Upon hearing the alarm, his nephew Shivam and Chandra Shekhar arrived at the spot, whereupon they were also assaulted by the applicant. The medical reports of the injured Shivam and Chandra Shekhar indicate that Shivam sustained one lacerated wound, while Chandra Shekhar sustained two abrasions on his left finger and the right side of his face. All the injuries are simple in nature, superficial and situated on non- vital parts of the body. 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Naushey Ali and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another (2025) 4 SCC 78 has held as under:- "15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras NA528 No. 17350 of 2025 2 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;" 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No.1551 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.37 of 2022, under Sections 307 and 323 I.P.C., Police Station Basai Mohammadpur, District Firozabad as well as charge-sheet dated 23.04.2022 are hereby quashed May 12, 2026 LN Tripathi NA528 No. 17350 of 2025 3 (Sanjiv Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- LALIT TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad