HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15297 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant/opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present 528 B.N.S.S. application has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 03.08.2022 passed by Learned Special Judge (D.A.A.), Jalaun at Orai in S.T. No. 29/2022, "State vs. Udham Yadav and another" and the impugned charge-sheet dated 05.11.2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 709/2016, under Sections 387, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Orai, District- Jalaun (Annexure 3 and 2) and the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 29/2022, "State vs. Udham Yadav and another", arising out of case crime no. 709/2016 u/s 387, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun pending before the court of Learned Special Judge (D.A.A.), Jalaun at Orai in the terms of compromise. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court and entered into a compromise. Applicants approached this Hon'ble Court by filing this 528 BNSS application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 09.05.2025 sent the matter to trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Pursuant to the order dated 09.05.2025, the Trial court vide order dated 10.07.2025 verified the parties as well as compromise Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Salman Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ahmad Nawaz Ansari, G.A., Saqib Meezan Udham Yadav @ Jitendra Singh @ Udham Singh And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) application through their counsels. Verification report/order dated 10.07.2025 has been filed with the supplementary affidavit. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their private and civil dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed. 6. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the court, hence, no reason to proceed further. 7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non-compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case. 9. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 03.08.2022 passed by Learned Special Judge (D.A.A.), Jalaun at Orai in S.T. No. 29/2022, "State vs. NA528 No. 15297 of 2025 2 Udham Yadav and another" and the impugned charge-sheet dated 05.11.2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 709/2016, under Sections 387, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Orai, District- Jalaun (Annexure 3 and 2) and the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 29/2022, "State vs. Udham Yadav and another", arising out of Case Crime No. 709/2016, under Sections 387, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Orai, District- Jalaun, pending before the court of Learned Special Judge (D.A.A.), Jalaun at Orai, are hereby quashed. 10. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed. September 11, 2025 Aditya NA528 No. 15297 of 2025 3 (Deepak Verma,J.) Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad