Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:94077 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 19410 of 2025 Applicant :- Yuglanand @ Anand Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the material available on record. 2. The present application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., has been filed seeking quashing of the charge sheet dated 05.01.2025, the cognizance order dated 15.01.2025, as well as the entire proceedings of Sessions Case No. 94 of 2021, State v. Yuglanand @ Anand, arising out of Case Crime No. 1274 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, and 376 IPC, and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad, pending before the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 1, Moradabad, on the ground of compromise entered into between the parties. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and the victim have solemnized their marriage and are living together happily as husband and wife, and have also resolved their disputes amicably. A compromise affidavit evidencing the settlement has been filed as Annexure-12 to the application. It is further submitted that the victim has voluntarily entered into the compromise and has no objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings. 4. The learned A.G.A. does not dispute the factual position and submits that as per the compromise deed, which has been duly executed and placed before the trial court, both the complainant and the victim have expressed no objection to the quashing of the proceedings. 5. It is a settled proposition of law that in appropriate cases involving offences of a private and personal nature, the High Court may invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (now corresponding to Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023), to quash criminal proceedings, where the parties have amicably resolved their dispute. In this regard, reliance may be placed upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. 6. While it is true that offences under Section 376 IPC and provisions of the POCSO Act are serious in nature, non- compoundable, and generally affect public interest and societal morality, the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case merit special consideration. The records reveal that the prosecutrix is now married to the applicant and is residing with him. She has filed a sworn affidavit indicating that the compromise has been entered into voluntarily and without any pressure, coercion, or undue influence. She has further stated that she has no objection to the quashing of the proceedings. 7. Nonetheless, it is imperative to underscore that the power to quash proceedings in such cases must be exercised with utmost caution, especially where offences involve minors and invoke broader public interest concerns. The Court must assess whether quashing the proceedings would serve the cause of justice or amount to a miscarriage thereof. 8. Upon a comprehensive evaluation of the facts and circumstances of the case, the voluntary nature of the compromise, the present status of the parties, and in light of the guiding principles laid down in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641, this Court is of the considered view that continuing the criminal proceedings would not subserve any useful purpose and would rather amount to an abuse of the process of the Court. The interest of justice would be better served by putting an end to the litigation. 9. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The charge sheet dated 05.01.2025, the cognizance order dated 15.01.2025, and the entire proceedings of Sessions Case No. 94 of 2021, State v. Yuglanand @ Anand, arising out of Case Crime No. 1274 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, and 376 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad, pending before the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 1, Moradabad, are hereby quashed. Order Date :- 28.5.2025 Anil K. Sharma Vinod Diwakar, J. Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad