Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:49525 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30031 of 2024 Applicant :- Buddhsen Alias Buddhsen Mauraya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Prem Sagar Verma,G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Prem Sagar Verma, 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 quash/set aside the impugned charge sheet no. 25/2024 dated 28.01.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 31.01.2024 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Baheri, Bareilly and the entire proceeding of Sessions Trial no. 386/2024 (State of U.P. vs. Buddhsen Maurya) pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 2, Bareilly arising out of Case Crime no. 362/2023, under sections 307, 504 IPC & Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station- Deoranian, District- Bareilly in view of the amicable settlement of the dispute between the parties. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that the parties had entered into compromise on dated 28.08.2024 and the same has also been verified by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 2, Bareilly vide order dated 04.01.2025 which is annexed to the order sheet and this fact has been endorsed by Sri Prem Sagar Verma, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2. 4. 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 light of the compromise. However, from perusal of the records, it transpired that compromise has took place in pursuance to sections pertaining to IPC but so far as Section 3/25 Arms Act against applicant is concerned the same has not been compromised by concerned authority. 5.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 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. 6. 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. 7. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, entire proceeding arising out of Sessions Trial no. 386/2024 (State of U.P. vs. Buddhsen Maurya) pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 2, Bareilly arising out of Case Crime no. 362/2023, under sections 307, 504 IPC & Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station- Deoranian, District- Bareilly are hereby quashed only against applicant in pursuance to sections 307, 504 IPC only. At the same time, learned court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 2, Bareilly is hereby directed to proceed against applicant only in pursuance to Section 3/25 Arms Act. 8. Accordingly, the present application under Section 482 of the Code stands partly allowed. 9. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today. Order Date :- 5.4.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad