. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 23811 of 2025 . Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Sri Ram Pyare, Advocate preferred 'vakalatnama' on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and supplementary affidavit preferred on behalf of the applicants, are taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. This application under section 528 BNSS has been preferred to quash the impugned charge-sheet no. 48 of 2021 dated 25.01.2021 including the entire proceedings of Case No. 1311 of 2024 (State vs. Lokesh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 395 of 2020, under Sections 354, 506, 323 IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station-Bannadevi, District-Aligarh pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court no. 2, Aligarh as well as to stay the further proceedings of abovementioned case. 4. In reference to the verification as directed by this Court vide order dated 23.07.2025, it is apprised by learned counsel for the applicant that compromise, which has been entered into between the parties, has been verified in presence of both the parties by the concerned court on dated 20.08.2025 and the same is on record, this fact has also been ascertained by learned counsel for opposite party no.2. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Sharma, Shiv Murti Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Anita Sharma And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite party and has been jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise. 6. A three-Judge Bench of the 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 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. 7. 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 proceedings to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties. 8. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, the impugned charge-sheet no. 48 of 2021 dated 25.01.2021 including the entire proceedings of Case No. 1311 of 2024 (State vs. Lokesh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 395 of 2020, under Sections 354, 506, 323 IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station-Bannadevi, District- Aligarh pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court no. 2, Aligarh, are hereby set-aside. 9. Accordingly, the instant application stands allowed. 10. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties and perusing the records kept on record preferred on behalf of the applicant. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application. NA528 No. 23811 of 2025 2 11. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today. September 10, 2025 #Vik/- NA528 No. 23811 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad