Kanhaiya v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others

"Sri Vijay Nath Pandey, Advocate alongwith Ms. Akanksha Awasthi, Advocate has filed the Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party No.4 which is taken on record. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the petitioner in the Court today is taken on record. Heard. Present petition has been filed for the following main relief(s):- "i. a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 27.02.2025 lodged at Case Crime No.0103 of 2025, Under Section 85, 115(2) B.N.S, 2023 in Police Station-Thakurganj, Lucknow lodged by the Opp. Party No.4, against the petitioner, as contained in Annexure No.1 to this Writ Petition. ii. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Opp. Party No.2 & 3 not to arrest the petitioner in connection with the impugned First Information Report dated 27.02.2025 lodged at Case Crime No.0103 of 2025, Under Section 85, 115(2) BNS of 2023 in Police Station-Thakurganj, Lucknow by the Opp. 2 CRLP No. 4927 of 2025 Party No.4. A copy of the impugned F.I.R dated 27.02.2025 is being filed herewith as Annexure No.1 to this Writ Petition." Learned counsel for the parties have submitted that petitioner and opposite party No.4-Insha have solemnized the marriage on 27.07.2024 and both the parties have settled their dispute amicably outside the court and have entered into compromise and the original compromise deed has been placed on record by means of Annexure No. S/A-1. Learned counsel for the parties have prayed that the compromise deed may be directed to be placed before the Senior Registrar of this Court for verification. In view of the aforesaid, let the compromise deed be placed before the Senior Registrar of this Court and the parties shall remain present before the Senior Registrar on 16.06.2025 for verification of the compromise. List this case before this Court on 20.06.2025 along with the report of the Senior Registrar. On the next date of listing, name of Sri Vijay Nath Pandey, Advocate alongwith Ms. Akanksha Awasthi, Advocate shall be shown in the cause list as counsel for the opposite party. It is provided that till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be arrested on the basis of impugned First Information Report. It is made clear that this order shall not be construed as an order of stay on the investigation. Accordingly, the investigation shall go on, as per law, and the petitioner shall cooperate in the same, failing which it shall be one of the grounds to move an application for vacation of interim protection granted by this order."

3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, parties appeared before the Senior Registrar of this Court on 14.08.2025 and the Senior Registrar submitted verification report dated 14.08.2025, which reads as under:- "Vide Hon'ble Court's order dated 11-08-2025, both parties were directed to appear before the undersigned today for verification of compromise deed. The said compromise deed has been annexed in original with supplementary affidavit dated

10.06.2025. 3 CRLP No. 4927 of 2025 Today, petitioner Kanhaiya Chaturvedi @ Kanhaiya S/o Uday Bhan alongwith his learned counsel Shri Amit Kumar Gupta, Advocate AND opposite party No. 4 Insha @ Insha Khan wife of Kanhaiya Chaturvedi alongwith her learned counsel Shri Vijay Nath Pandey, Advocate are present before me. Vakalatnama of counsels for both the parties are on record. The proof of identity i.e. original Aadhar Cards are produced by both the parties, at the time of verification. The contents of the said compromise deed have been read over and explained to both the parties to the compromise deed and they have accepted the execution of the same according to their free will and as a token thereof they have affixed their photographs, put L.T.Is. and signatures, which are duly attested and verified by their respective counsels. In view of the said facts, the compromise between petitioner Kanhaiya Chaturvedi @ Kanhaiya S/o Uday Bhan AND opposite party No. 4 Insha @ Insha Khan wife of Kanhaiya Chaturvedi is being verified by me today i.e. 14th day of August, 2025. The report is submitted before Hon'ble Court for orders."

4. Learned counsels for the parties have stated that they are not willing to contest the case pursuant to the impugned FIR dated 27.02.2025, lodged by opposite party No.4, bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0103 of 2025, under Sections 85, 115(2) B.N.S., Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the impugned FIR may be set aside/quashed on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

6. Learned A.G.A. has not disputed the fact that the parties have entered into compromise and the compromise deed has been verified by the Senior Registrar of this Court, therefore, he has stated that any appropriate order, in the interest of justice, may be passed.

7. The Apex Court in re: Unnikrishnan alias Unnikuttan vs. State of Kerala, reported in (2018) 15 Supreme Court Cases 343, has observed that even if the offence(s) in question is / are not compoundable within the scope of Section 320 Cr.P.C. even then considering the facts and circumstances of the case in question the Constitutional Court may allow the parties to compound such offence(s) on the basis of compromise arrived at 4 CRLP No. 4927 of 2025 between the parties.

8. Not only the above, considering the facts and circumstances of the issue in question and other dictums of the Apex Court in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak, (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish, (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup, (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh, (2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641, the First Information Report dated 27.02.2025, lodged by opposite party No.4, bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0103 of 2025, under Sections 85, 115(2) B.N.S., Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow is hereby quashed in respect of the present petitioner on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

9. The petition is, therefore, allowed. (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) August 27, 2025 (Manoj K.)/RBS MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

"Sri Vijay Nath Pandey, Advocate alongwith Ms. Akanksha Awasthi, Advocate has filed the Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party No.4 which is taken on record. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the petitioner in the Court today is taken on record. Heard. Present petition has been filed for the following main relief(s):- "i. a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 27.02.2025 lodged at Case Crime No.0103 of 2025, Under Section 85, 115(2) B.N.S, 2023 in Police Station-Thakurganj, Lucknow lodged by the Opp. Party No.4, against the petitioner, as contained in Annexure No.1 to this Writ Petition. ii. a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Opp. Party No.2 & 3 not to arrest the petitioner in connection with the impugned First Information Report dated 27.02.2025 lodged at Case Crime No.0103 of 2025, Under Section 85, 115(2) BNS of 2023 in Police Station-Thakurganj, Lucknow by the Opp. 2 CRLP No. 4927 of 2025 Party No.4. A copy of the impugned F.I.R dated 27.02.2025 is being filed herewith as Annexure No.1 to this Writ Petition." Learned counsel for the parties have submitted that petitioner and opposite party No.4-Insha have solemnized the marriage on 27.07.2024 and both the parties have settled their dispute amicably outside the court and have entered into compromise and the original compromise deed has been placed on record by means of Annexure No. S/A-1. Learned counsel for the parties have prayed that the compromise deed may be directed to be placed before the Senior Registrar of this Court for verification. In view of the aforesaid, let the compromise deed be placed before the Senior Registrar of this Court and the parties shall remain present before the Senior Registrar on 16.06.2025 for verification of the compromise. List this case before this Court on 20.06.2025 along with the report of the Senior Registrar. On the next date of listing, name of Sri Vijay Nath Pandey, Advocate alongwith Ms. Akanksha Awasthi, Advocate shall be shown in the cause list as counsel for the opposite party. It is provided that till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be arrested on the basis of impugned First Information Report. It is made clear that this order shall not be construed as an order of stay on the investigation. Accordingly, the investigation shall go on, as per law, and the petitioner shall cooperate in the same, failing which it shall be one of the grounds to move an application for vacation of interim protection granted by this order."

3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, parties appeared before the Senior Registrar of this Court on 14.08.2025 and the Senior Registrar submitted verification report dated 14.08.2025, which reads as under:- "Vide Hon'ble Court's order dated 11-08-2025, both parties were directed to appear before the undersigned today for verification of compromise deed. The said compromise deed has been annexed in original with supplementary affidavit dated

10.06.2025. 3 CRLP No. 4927 of 2025 Today, petitioner Kanhaiya Chaturvedi @ Kanhaiya S/o Uday Bhan alongwith his learned counsel Shri Amit Kumar Gupta, Advocate AND opposite party No. 4 Insha @ Insha Khan wife of Kanhaiya Chaturvedi alongwith her learned counsel Shri Vijay Nath Pandey, Advocate are present before me. Vakalatnama of counsels for both the parties are on record. The proof of identity i.e. original Aadhar Cards are produced by both the parties, at the time of verification. The contents of the said compromise deed have been read over and explained to both the parties to the compromise deed and they have accepted the execution of the same according to their free will and as a token thereof they have affixed their photographs, put L.T.Is. and signatures, which are duly attested and verified by their respective counsels. In view of the said facts, the compromise between petitioner Kanhaiya Chaturvedi @ Kanhaiya S/o Uday Bhan AND opposite party No. 4 Insha @ Insha Khan wife of Kanhaiya Chaturvedi is being verified by me today i.e. 14th day of August, 2025. The report is submitted before Hon'ble Court for orders."

4. Learned counsels for the parties have stated that they are not willing to contest the case pursuant to the impugned FIR dated 27.02.2025, lodged by opposite party No.4, bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0103 of 2025, under Sections 85, 115(2) B.N.S., Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the impugned FIR may be set aside/quashed on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

6. Learned A.G.A. has not disputed the fact that the parties have entered into compromise and the compromise deed has been verified by the Senior Registrar of this Court, therefore, he has stated that any appropriate order, in the interest of justice, may be passed.

7. The Apex Court in re: Unnikrishnan alias Unnikuttan vs. State of Kerala, reported in (2018) 15 Supreme Court Cases 343, has observed that even if the offence(s) in question is / are not compoundable within the scope of Section 320 Cr.P.C. even then considering the facts and circumstances of the case in question the Constitutional Court may allow the parties to compound such offence(s) on the basis of compromise arrived at 4 CRLP No. 4927 of 2025 between the parties.

8. Not only the above, considering the facts and circumstances of the issue in question and other dictums of the Apex Court in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak, (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish, (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup, (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh, (2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641, the First Information Report dated 27.02.2025, lodged by opposite party No.4, bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0103 of 2025, under Sections 85, 115(2) B.N.S., Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow is hereby quashed in respect of the present petitioner on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

9. The petition is, therefore, allowed. (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) August 27, 2025 (Manoj K.)/RBS MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench