Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113691 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18867 of 2024 Applicant :- Ashik Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Brijesh Kumar Pandey,G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri S.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent no.1, Sri B.K. Pandey, learned counsel for O.P. nos.2 & 3 and perused the record. 2. In the instant matter an FIR was lodged on 07.07.2017 under Sections 363, 366 IPC against the applicant wherein it is alleged that the applicant has enticed away O.P. no.3 (daughter of the first informant). After due investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted including one additional section i.e., Section 376 IPC. During trial, victim has been produced as PW-2 who has made her statement dated 13.12.2021 that she went with the present applicant (accused) on her own volition without any duress and coercion. At later stage, she solemnized marriage with the accused and out of their wedlock, they have two children (a boy and a girl). During pendency of trial, keeping in mind the welfare of his grandsons and daughter, O.P. no.2 had entered into compromise with the accused-applicant on 13.05.2024, copy whereof has been enclosed as Annexure-3 to the instant application. 3. In view of aforesaid facts, vide order dated 26.06.2024, the parties were directed to appear before the concerned trial court for verification of compromise. 4. In pursuance of aforesaid order, report dated 12.07.2024 has been sent by the concerned trial court, which is available on record. On perusal of said report, it transpires that the parties had appeared before the trial, who were identified by their respective counsel and the compromise was verified by the trial court on 05.07.2024. Since the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and the applicant has married O.P. no.2 (daughter of informant) and out of their wedlock they have two children and O.P. no.2 does not want to prosecute the applicant, no useful purpose would be served in keeping it pending. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has no objection if the instant application is allowed and the entire proceedings are quashed in terms of the compromise between the parties. Learned counsel for O.P. nos.2 and 3 has admitted the fact of compromise and also the marriage of applicant with the victim (O.P. no.3). 6. It transpires from the record that in the light of marriage having taken place between the victim and the accused/applicant, more particularly, they have also two children out of their wedlock, shows that the couple are leading a happy marital life. In the teeth of these facts, glaring enough they are, if the Court would shut its doors to the married couple, the entire proceeding would result in miscarriage of justice. As such, no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of accused/applicant. 7. On account of the facts as noted above, the chances of conviction of accused/applicant is now not only remote but also bleak in view of the compromise entered into by the parties. As such, in case the criminal prosecution of applicant is allowed to continue, a happy family comprising of accused/applicant and victim shall stand broken. 8. At this juncture, reference be made to the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dasari Srikanth vs. State of Telangana, 2024 Live Law (SC) 391 wherein the Court has held in para No.8 as under: "8. Since, the appellant and the complainant have married each other, the affirmation of the judgment rendered by the High Court would have the disastrous consequence on the accused appellant being sent to jail which in turn could put his matrimonial relationship with the complainant in danger." 9. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, (2019) 5 SCC 688 has laid down principle for quashing the proceeding on the basis of settlement/compromise. The ratio laid down by the Apex Court in aforementioned judgements is squarely applicable to the present case as the applicant has solemnized marriage with the victim (O.P. no.3) and the compromise has also arrived at between the parties, which has been verified by the concerned trial court. 10. In view of the aforesaid facts, since the applicant has married the victim and the parties have amicably settled their dispute before the trial court, the present Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. is liable to be allowed. 11. Accordingly, the present Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed and the entire proceeding of Special Sessions Trial No. 47/2017, chargesheet dated 07.08.2017, arising out of Case Crime No.350/2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Naugawah Sadat, District- J.P. Nagar (Amroha) (State v. Ashik) pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act-III, J.P. Nagar (Amroha), qua the present applicant is hereby quashed in terms of compromise dated 13.05.2024. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Manish Himwan Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad