Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:45326 Court No. - 70 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10564 of 2025 Applicant :- Chandraveer And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gagan Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Gagan Pratap Singh, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A..G.A. for State-opposite party-1 and Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate, who has put in appearance on behalf of first informant/opposite party-2 by filing his vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken on record. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicants-Chandraveer And 6 Others, who are charge sheeted and have been summoned by court below, have approached this Court by means of present application under Section 528 BNSS with the following prayer: " It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the entire criminal proceeding of the case no. 2568 of 2017 (State Vs. Chandraveer) arising out of impugned summoning order dated 20.06.2017 in case crime no. 900 of 2016 under section 376D, 323, 506, 377 I.P.C., police station Sadabad, District Hathras, on the basis of the compromise between the parties. It is further prayed for the stay the further proceeding of case no. 2568 of 2017 (State Vs. Chandraveer) arising out of impugned summoning order dated 20.06.2017 in case crime no. 900 of 2016 under section 376D, 323, 506, 377 I.P.C., police station Sadabad, District Hathras, pending before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hathras. During the pendency of the present application and/or pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." 4. Learned counsel for applicants submits that during the pendency of aforementioned criminal proceedings, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of the compromise entered into by the parties was reduced to writing and in accordance with terms thereof, an application dated 22.02.2024 was jointly filed by parties before court below praying therein that the proceedings of aforementioned criminal case be terminated in view of the compromise entered into by the parties. 5. Learned counsel for applicants then submits that though aforementioned application was filed on 22.02.2024 and inspite of the fact that a period of more than one year and one month has rolled by. but no order has been passed by court below on the aforesaid application. 6. Consequently, applicants have approached this Court by means of present application. 7. On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicant contends that impugned criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed by this Court. He further submits that in view of the compromise entered into by the parties, the chances of conviction of accused/applicants are not only remote but also bleak. As such, no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicants. It is thus urged by the learned counsel for applicant that the present application is liable to be allowed by this Court.. 8. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. representing State-opposite party-1 has opposed the present application by contending that offence under Section 376 I.P.C. is not compoundable in terms of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Furthermore the offence under Section 376 is an offence against society. Apart from above, the Apex Court in Rampal Vs. State of Haryana, AIR OnLine 2019 SC 1716, has categorically observed that there can be no compromise in matters of rape and sexual assault. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. thus submits that the compromise entered into by the parties is of no consequence. As such no interference is warranted by this Court in present application. 9. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicants could not overcome the same. 10. Having heard the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the preliminary objection raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application under Section 528 BNSS is not only borne out from the record but furthermore the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicants with reference to the record at this stage. In view of above, no good ground now exists to entertain the present application. 11. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 12. It is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 2.4.2025/YK Digitally signed by :- YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad