Adding his arguments, he submits that as per the vs Court has formulated the guidelines so far as the

Sri Amit Kumar Pathak,Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of the B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Sessions Case No. 1365 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 06 of 2023, under section 307 of I.P.C. and section 30 of the Arms Act, Police Station- Jankipuram, District-Lucknow as well ass the dated 08-02-2023 alongwith chargesheet summoning order dated 28-03-2023, issued against the applicant. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that due to some misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 15-07-2025, which has been annexed as annexure no. 4 to the instant application. He next added that now there is no grievance in between the parties with each other and the criminal proceedings against the applicants are the futile exercise as there is no fate of trial and that amounts to harassment of the applicant. He has also pointed out that though the offence under section 307 of I.P.C. is charged, but, it is of no injury case as the allegation was opening fire over the alleged injured, but, there is no injury at all. Adding his arguments, he submits that as per the ratio of law laid down in paragraph no. 15.4 in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Laxmi Narayan and Others, reported in (2019) 5 Supreme Court Cases, 688, the Hon'ble Apex Court has formulated the guidelines so far as the compromise under sections 307 readwith section 34 I.P.C. is concerned. Para no. 15.4 of the Judgment in the case of Laxmi Narayan(Supra) is extracted hereinunder:- "15.4 Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufÏcient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove." Referring the aforesaid ratio, he submits that in the instant matter, the nature of injuries are as such wherein this court can invoke jurisdiction while exercising its powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the criminal proceedings. He next added that criminal proceedings initiated in the instant matter would be a futile exercise and therefore, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Case Crime No. 06 of 2023, may be quashed On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that the parties have settled their dispute amicably through a compromise deed and there is no further grievance of the opposite parties against the present applicants and the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped. Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid. Now whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the court below as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court. Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record. The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Sessions Case No. 1365 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 06 of 2023, under section 307 of I.P.C. and section 30 of the Arms Act, Police Station-Jankipuram, District- Lucknow, shall remain stayed so far as present applicant is concerned. The trial court is further directed for ensuring the fact that all the parties against whom the chargesheet was filed are present before the trial court and a report with respect to this effect shall also be sent alongwith verification order. OfÏce is directed to return the copy of original compromise deed to learned counsel for the applicants within a week. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sri Amit Kumar Pathak,Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of the B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Sessions Case No. 1365 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 06 of 2023, under section 307 of I.P.C. and section 30 of the Arms Act, Police Station- Jankipuram, District-Lucknow as well ass the dated 08-02-2023 alongwith chargesheet summoning order dated 28-03-2023, issued against the applicant. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that due to some misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 15-07-2025, which has been annexed as annexure no. 4 to the instant application. He next added that now there is no grievance in between the parties with each other and the criminal proceedings against the applicants are the futile exercise as there is no fate of trial and that amounts to harassment of the applicant. He has also pointed out that though the offence under section 307 of I.P.C. is charged, but, it is of no injury case as the allegation was opening fire over the alleged injured, but, there is no injury at all. Adding his arguments, he submits that as per the ratio of law laid down in paragraph no. 15.4 in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Laxmi Narayan and Others, reported in (2019) 5 Supreme Court Cases, 688, the Hon'ble Apex Court has formulated the guidelines so far as the compromise under sections 307 readwith section 34 I.P.C. is concerned. Para no. 15.4 of the Judgment in the case of Laxmi Narayan(Supra) is extracted hereinunder:- "15.4 Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufÏcient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove." Referring the aforesaid ratio, he submits that in the instant matter, the nature of injuries are as such wherein this court can invoke jurisdiction while exercising its powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the criminal proceedings. He next added that criminal proceedings initiated in the instant matter would be a futile exercise and therefore, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Case Crime No. 06 of 2023, may be quashed On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that the parties have settled their dispute amicably through a compromise deed and there is no further grievance of the opposite parties against the present applicants and the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped. Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid. Now whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the court below as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court. Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record. The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Sessions Case No. 1365 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 06 of 2023, under section 307 of I.P.C. and section 30 of the Arms Act, Police Station-Jankipuram, District- Lucknow, shall remain stayed so far as present applicant is concerned. The trial court is further directed for ensuring the fact that all the parties against whom the chargesheet was filed are present before the trial court and a report with respect to this effect shall also be sent alongwith verification order. OfÏce is directed to return the copy of original compromise deed to learned counsel for the applicants within a week. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench