Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87512 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10708 of 2025 Applicant :- Viplav Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kiran Yadav,Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sury Pratap Singh,G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for parties. 2. The present application has been filed to quash chargesheet dated 28.05.2019 along with cognizance order dated 17.10.2020 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Session Trial No. 1003 of 2020 (State Vs. Viplav Yadav), arising out of Case Crime No.0176 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Panki, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of learned Addl. District Judge-22, Kanpur Nagar. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant submitted that compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified by learned court concerned on dated 06.05.2025 which has been appended with this petition, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for respondent no.2. 4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise. 5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. 6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties. 7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, chargesheet dated 28.05.2019 along with cognizance order dated 17.10.2020 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Session Trial No. 1003 of 2020 (State Vs. Viplav Yadav), arising out of Case Crime No.0176 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Panki, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of learned Addl. District Judge-22, Kanpur Nagar, are hereby quashed. 8. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed. 9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties. If at all, respondent no. 2 feels that she has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, she may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application. 10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today. Order Date :- 19.5.2025 Vivek Kr. Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad