Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39703 Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26630 of 2024 Applicant :- Anup Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Priti Singh,Satyendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shrinivas Yadav,Surendra Mohan Mishra Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/ opposite party No.1 and learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and perused the record. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the charge-sheet dated 18.06.2019, cognizance order dated 06.12.2021 and proceedings of Special Trial No. 515 of 2021 (State Vs. Anup Kumar Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 0104 of 2019, under Sections 353, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(r) and (s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Lar, District Deoria pending in the court of Special Judge, SC/ST, Court No. 2, Deoria. Filtering out unnecessary details, the basic facts in brief, which are necessary for disposal of this case as argued by learned counsel for the applicant are that opposite party no. 2 lodged a first information report on 21.04.2019 against the applicant Anoop Kumar Yadav and five other persons, namely, Sonu Yadav, Shailendra Yadav, Abhay Yadav and Tunnu Yadav for the offence under Sections 147, 353, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(r) and (s) SC/ST Act, in which after culmination of investigation, Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet no. 114 of 2019 on 18.06.2019 against the present applicant, on which concerned Court below took cognizance on 06.12.2021. Thereafter the applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise, in which this Court vide order dated 02.09.2024 directed the parties concerned to file compromise within two weeks before the concerned Court below and further concerned Court below was directed to verify the said compromise and to send its report to this Court. Thereafter, the parties concerned have filed compromise application dated 13.09.2024 before the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No. 2, Deoria. Pursuant to the order dated 02.09.2024, trial Court submitted its report dated 26.09.2024 mentioning inter alia that compromise application no. 10kha/1-2 was filed on 13.09.2024 and the same has been verified in presence of the parties and their counsel on 26.09.2024. On the strength of aforesaid facts, it is submitted that on account of compromise arrived at between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, therefore, continuance of criminal proceedings pursuant to impugned charge- sheet against the applicant after compromise between them would be a futile exercise and the same is liable to be quashed by this Court. Learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No.2 do not dispute the aforesaid facts. Learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 has also submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, opposite party No.2 has no grievance and has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicant. After having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, I find that after compromise/ settlement arrived at between the parties in the present case, the chance of ultimate conviction is bleak and therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution against the applicant to continue, as the same would be futile exercise and a sheer wastage of precious time of the Court. The continuation of criminal proceedings after compromise would cause oppression and prejudice to the parties concerned. If the parties concerned want to bury the hatchet and are willing to move on in personal dispute on the basis of compromise, they may be allowed to compound the offences in terms of settlement, because in such circumstances the proceedings can hardly be taken to their logical culmination and, the prospect of conviction gets lost. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of dictum and guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Ramawatar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 2021 Supreme Court 5228, this Court feels that this is a fit case, where this Court can exercise its inherent power to secure the end of justice. In the case in hand interest of justice would be met, if the prayer of parties is acceded to and the criminal proceedings and other litigation between the parties is brought to an end. In view of the above, criminal proceedings of the aforesaid case against the applicant are hereby quashed. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in terms of compromise as mentioned above. Order Date :- 19.3.2025 Shubham Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad