HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22267 of 2025 Court No. - 92 HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J. 1. Heard Shri Ashutosh Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Mohd. Faizan Ali, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State. 2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing of the impugned order dated 28.01.2025 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Mathura in Case No. 460 of 2019 (New Number) (State Vs. Brijesh), arising out of Case Crime No.498 of 1999, under Sections 323, 326, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Mathura. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that matter relates to civil dispute and both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter. He next submits that a compromise has been signed by both the applicant and the injured, who are represented by their respective counsels. It is submitted that there was a long-standing property dispute between the parties, which has now been amicably settled. The dispute is of a private nature. It is further submits that the accused is the real younger brother of the informant, and the property dispute between them has been resolved in terms of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashutosh Gupta, Punit Kesarwani, Vandana Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mohammad Areeb, Mohd. Faizan Ali Brijesh Chaturvedi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) the aforesaid compromise. Inasmuch as the charge under Section 326 IPC is not made out, as the allegation is that the assault was committed by the accused using fists and kicks, due to which one tooth of the informant was broken. No weapon or object, as described under Section 326 IPC, is alleged to have been involved in the present case, hence, the impugned proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant as well as opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 06.08.2025 a direction was given to the court below to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, learned court below had verified the contents of compromise. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the court below vide report dated 20.08.2025. 6. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court below. 7. Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties. 8. In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter is purely of private nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be NA528 No. 22267 of 2025 2 served in proceeding with the matter further. 9. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and impugned order dated 28.01.2025 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Mathura in Case No. 460 of 2019 (New Number) (State Vs. Brijesh), arising out of Case Crime No.498 of 1999, under Sections 323, 326, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Mathura is hereby quashed. September 17, 2025 Amit NA528 No. 22267 of 2025 3 (Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad