Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64517 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26182 of 2023 Applicant :- Rakesh Yadav And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Kesari Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ambikesh Kumar Sharma,G.A. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J. 1. Heard Sri Raj Kumar Kesari, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Vimal Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Ambikesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Ramesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the charge-sheet dated 24.12.2022, order dated 08.06.2023 by which cognizance has been taken against applicant no.1 under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and against applicant nos. 2 and 3 under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. and proceedings of Criminal Case No. 341 of 2023 (State Vs. Rakesh Yadav) in Case Crime No. 296 of 2022, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Badlapur, District-Jaunpur, pending in the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), New Court No.III/Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur. 3. Facts giving rise to the present controversy are that opposite party no. 2 has lodged F.I.R. against the applicants on 07.11.2022 u/s 376, 506 I.P.C. The allegation is that opposite party no. 2 and applicant no. 1 were in relationship and during that relationship, they also developed physical intimacy with further allegation that when opposite party no. 2 asked applicant no. 1 to get married to her, then he instead of marrying her, kept on making physical relationship against her wishes. The police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet on 24.12.2022. Thereafter, cognizance was also taken by the learned Magistrate on 08.06.2023 which is under challenge. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that during the pendency of impugned proceeding, parties have settled their dispute and sorted out their differences as it is clear from the statement of opposite party no. 2 recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. that there was consensual relationship between them. Therefore, offence u/s 376 I.P.C. is not made out. Even otherwise now parties have settled their dispute amicably and compromise dated 08.03.2022 has also been entered into between them. But the compromise has not been filed before the court below. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection that aforesaid compromise is yet to be verified by the court below, therefore, applicants may be directed to file aforesaid compromise before the court below for verification. 6. Considering the aforesaid submission, present application is disposed of with a direction to the applicants to file original deed of compromise before the court below, within a period of 15 days. In case, such compromise is filed before the court below, the court below will verify the same after summoning the parties within a period of two months from the date of receiving the copy of compromise. 7. After verification of the compromise, court below will dispose of the impugned proceeding, in accordance with law. 8. It is further provided that for a period of two and a half months or till the verification of compromise, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. 9. It is further provided that applicants are at liberty to file fresh application u/s 528 B.N.S.S., if required, to quash the impugned proceeding on the basis of verified compromise. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 KS Digitally signed by :- KISHAN SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad