Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142129 Court No. - 89 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 23878 of 2025 Applicant :- Nazir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Verma Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J. 1. Heard Ms. Zulekha Begum holding brief of Mohd. Waseem, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Reena holding brief of Sri Rajesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Shri B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State. 2. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 3.8.2023 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 31.5.2024 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Baheri, District Bareilly on the basis of compromise in S.T. No. 474 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 193 of 2023 under section 376 (2) N, IPC, P.S. Sheeshgarh, District Bareilly against appicant pending in the court of Additional District Judge/FTC District Bareilly. It is also prayed to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case during pendency of the present application. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that all the disputes and differences have been settled between the parties. The copy of compromise entered into between the parties has been annexed as annexure no. 6 to the application which has been verified by the court concerned. It is further submitted that applicant and opposite party no. 2 have also solemnized marriage and Nikahnama of them is also annexed as Annexure No. 7 of the application. At this stage, learned counsel further submitted that continuation of the proceedings of the aforesaid case will be an abuse of process of law. No fruitful purpose would be served keeping the matter pending. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicants has also placed reliance on the law laid down by Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012), 10 SCC 303, B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582. 4. On the other hand, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submit that since the dispute between the parties has been settled, he has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case pending before the trial court is quashed. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record. 6. Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably and mutually settled, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting to continue the criminal case pending before the trial court and it would simply be a waste of time if the aforesaid case is permitted to continue till its logical conclusion. 7. In view of the above, the Application u/s 528 BNSS is allowed. 8. The entire proceeding of S.T. No. 474 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 193 of 2023 under section 376 (2) N, IPC, P.S. Sheeshgarh, District Bareilly pending in the court of Additional District Judge/FTC District Bareilly against the applicant is quashed in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 SY Digitally signed by :- SUSHAMA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad