HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46377 of 2023 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Dalvir Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Raj Narayan Gupta, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. 3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants- Mohan, Ajay@Karu, Ram Lakhan, Rameshwar, Veer Bahadur,Dafedar Singh, Pintu@Arjun and Satendra with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 6950 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No.188 of 2014, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 I.P.C., Police Station- Naya Gaon, District Etah, along with charge sheet dated 28.1.2015, cognizance order dated 10.08.2015, pending before the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No. 22, Etah with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the said case during pendency of this application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the parties have settled the dispute amicably out of court and on the basis of compromise the applicants filed the present application in which an order for verification of the compromise was passed on 4.1.2024. It is argued that in compliance of the order dated 4.1.2024 the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dalvir Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Raj Narayan Gupta Mohan And 7 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) parties have filed the order of this Court along with the said compromise deed before the concerned court for verification of the same, after which the concerned court has verified the said compromise vide its order dated 22.1.2024, copy of the said order is annexure no. S.A.-2 to the supplementary affidavit dated 14.2.2024. It is submitted that criminal history of the applicant no. 1 Mohan@Abhay Pratap, has been disclosed and explained in para- 12 of the rejoinder affidavit dated 23.11.2025, which is on record. It is argued that the opposite party no. 2 is not interested to pursue the matter pending in the trial court and is not inclined to give any evidence against the applicants and therefore the impugned proceedings be quashed on the ground of compromise between the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. could not dispute the fact that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties which was duly verified by the concerned trial court. 6. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed. 7. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings, charge sheet, cognizance order as prayed for by the applicant(s). A482 No. 46377 of 2023 2 8. The present application is allowed. 9. The impugned cognizance order, charge sheet and the proceedings of the said case are hereby quashed. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal,J.) September 24, 2026 Naresh A482 No. 46377 of 2023 3 Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad