HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21189 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Virendra Singh Yadav learned counsel for applicants, Sri Manish Kumar holding brief of Shri Abrar Ahmad Siddiqui, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for State. 2. Present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C has been preferred with a prayer to allow the instant application and stay and quash the Session Case No.131 of 2021, (State vs. Sushant and others), arising out of Case Crime no.137 of 2019, under Sections 354, 323, 506 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, as well as N.B.W and Section 82 Cr.P.C order dated 12.04.2022 and 24.4.2025 respectively, Police Station Bheempura, District Ballia passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.8, Ballia. 3. On the basis of verification report submitted by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.8, Ballia on the compromise application, entered between the parties which has been appended along with the order sheet, the parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and it has been jointly 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 the light of compromise. 4.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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Virendra Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abrar Ahmad Siddiqui, G.A. Harikesh And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 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. 5. 5. 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. 6. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire proceeding of Session Case No.131 of 2021, (State vs. Sushant and others), arising out of Case Crime no.137 of 2019, under Sections 354, 323, 506 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, as well as N.B.W and Section 82 Cr.P.C order dated 12.04.2022 and 24.4.2025 respectively, Police Station Bheempura, District Ballia passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.8, Ballia, are hereby quashed. 7. Accordingly, the present application under Section 528 BNSS stands allowed. 8. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today. September 24, 2025 Rakesh NA528 No. 21189 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad