HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16451 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present application has been filed to quash the impugned charge-sheet no.179 of 2024 dated 14.06.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 01.08.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.15739 of 2024 (State Vs. Raju Thakur @ Babloo Thakur @ Yogendra Singh) arising out of Case Crime No.222 of 2024, under sections 307, 504, 506, 324 IPC and sections 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Nawabad, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge-I, Jhansi. 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 Additional Session Judge, Court No.1, Jhansi on dated 03.07.2025, which has been appended with supplementary affidavit preferred on behalf of the applicant, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for opposite parties. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pt. S.P. Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Archana Maurya, G.A. Raju Thakur @ Babloo Thakur @ Yogendra Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. 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, impugned charge-sheet no.179 of 2024 dated 14.06.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 01.08.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.15739 of 2024 (State Vs. Raju Thakur @ Babloo Thakur @ Yogendra Singh) arising out of Case Crime No.222 of 2024, under sections 307, 504, 506, 324 IPC and sections 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Nawabad, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge-I, Jhansi, 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, opposite party no.2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he 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. September 11, 2025 Saif NA528 No. 16451 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad