HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42902 of 2026 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. This matter is being taken up out of turn from the category of cases which have been mentioned in the morning on account of urgency. Heard learned counsel for parties. 2. Present application has been preferred with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case no. 4501515 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime no. C-3 of 2002 under Section 147, 149, 323, 307, 427, 506, 352 IPC, PS- Civil Lines, District Meerut as well as summoning order dated 30.4.2004 passed on Protest Petition by rejecting the final report no. 102 of 2003 related to FIR of Case Crime no. C-3 of 2002 in terms of compromise. 3. Learned counsel for applicants submitted that parties concerned appeared before court concerned and filed fresh compromise deed and the said compromise entered between applicants and opposite party no. 2 has been verified by learned court concerned and verification report dated 6.5.2026 has already been received from learned court concerned and the same is appended as Annexure no. 6 to the instant application wherein it is mentioned that compromise entered by both the parties have been verified by learned court concerned. 4. Learned AGA for the State showed no objection to aforesaid Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vedu @ Ved Prakash Yadav And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) contention of learned counsel for applicants. 5. From perusal of records, it transpires that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and it has been 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 verification report. 6. 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. 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 proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties. 8. In case of H.N.Pandakumar vs. State of Karnataka [2025 INSC 37], Hon'ble Apex Court has also observed that if the offence is non-compoundable which is having no serious impact on society then there would be no harm and error if the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise entered into between the parties. 9. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire proceeding of Criminal Case no. 4501515 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime no. C-3 of 2002 under Section 147, 149, 323, 307, 427, 506, 352 IPC, PS- Civil Lines, District Meerut, are NA528 No. 42902 of 2026 2 hereby quashed, only in respect of applicants. 10. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed. 11. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that he/she has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he/she may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application. October 6, 2026 Shaswat NA528 No. 42902 of 2026 3 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad