Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77855 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 13188 of 2025 Applicant :- Ram Ratan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Markande Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Surendra Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Raju Upadhyaya, learned counsel for applicants, Sri Surendra Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State. 2. Present application u/s 528 BNSS has been preferred with a prayer to quash the impugned proceedings of S.T. no. 22 of 2019 in Case Crime no. 822 of 2016 (State vs. Ram Ratan and others) under sections 323, 504, 354 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, PS- Shadiabad, District- Ghazipur on basis of verified compromise, verified by trial court in pursuance of order dated 06.12.2024 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. Application u/s 482 no. 46496 of 2019 (Ram Ratan vs. State of U.P. and another). 3. Learned counsel for applicants submitted that the parties had entered into compromise on dated 27.08.2024 and the same has also been verified by learned Additional Special Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Ghazipur vide order dated 27.02.2025 which is annexed as Annexure no. 11 to the affidavit and as such the entire impugned proceedings against applicants be quashed. 4. Sri Surendra Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State showed no objection to aforesaid contention of learned counsel for applicants. 5. From perusal of records, it transpires that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for the parties and it has been submitted that there would be no harm and error and it would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise. 6.A three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble 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. 7. 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. 8. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire proceeding of S.T. no. 22 of 2019 in Case Crime no. 822 of 2016 (State vs. Ram Ratan and others) under sections 323, 504, 354 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, PS- Shadiabad, District- Ghazipur, is hereby quashed, only in respect of applicants herein namely Ram Ratan, Shyam Sunder and Ravindra Alias Bholi. 9. Accordingly, the present application under Section 528 BNSS stands allowed. 10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad