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

1. Sri Brijendra Pratap Singh, Advocate has put in appearance by filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 and the same is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Brijendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the material placed on record.

3. By means of the instant application, the applicants have prayed to quash the chargesheet No.-1/2020 dated 29/11/2020 and quash the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. -0467/2020, U/S-147, 148, 323, 504, 307, 336, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Gosainganj, District -Lucknow registered as S.T. No. 1309 of 2022 and consequential summoning order issued against the applicants/petitioners, in view of compromise arrived at between the parties which was duly verified vide order dated 07.08.2025, through Annexure No.-5 to this affidavit, in pursuance of order dated 28.07.2025, passed by this Hon'ble Court in A-482 No. 5911 of 2025.

4. On 28.07.2025, the following order was passed:- ""Sri Brijendra Pratap Singh, Advocate, has put in appearance for the private opposite party No. 2/complainant and has filed his Vakalatnama in the Court today, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2 A482 No. 8097 of 2025 Instant application has been preferred by the applicant(s) for the following main relief(s):- "The petitioners named above most respectfully begs to submit that for the facts, reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the chargesheet No.- 1/ 2020 dated 29/11/2020 filed in Case Crime No. 0467/2020, U/S-147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307, 336, 427, 324, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Gosaiganj, District-Lucknow, as contained in Annexure No.-2, Pending in the Court of Ld. A.D.J., Court No.-16, Lucknow, registered as S.T. No.1309/2022 (State Vs. Satendra Kumar Rawat and others) and for quashing of entire proceeding of Case Crime No. 0467/2020, U/S - 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307, 336, 427, 324, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Gosaiganj, District Lucknow and consequential Summoning order dated 12.08.2021, in view of compromise arrived at between the parties in Case Crime No. 0467/2020, U/S-147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307, 336, 427, 324, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Gosaiganj, District - Lucknow as contained in as Annexure No.-3." It is stated that in the incident/altercation, which took place on 12.09.2020, persons from the both the sides sustained injuries and therefore, two FIRs i.e. FIR No. 0467/2020, basis of pending criminal proceedings, was lodged by the opposite party No. 2/Salman Husain against the applicants on 13.09.2020 at about 00.38 hours making allegations therein so as to attract the offences as indicated under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307, 336, 427 IPC & Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act at Police Station- Gosaiganj, District- Lucknow and another FIR i.e. FIR No. 0466/2020 was lodged by Lal Bahadur Pasi implicating the persons from the complainant's side of FIR in issue i.e. FIR No. 0467/2020, on 12.09.2020 at about

23.48 hours making making allegations therein so as to attract the offences as indicated under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 307, 336 IPC, 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act at Police Station- Gosaiganj, District- Lucknow. It is further stated that a perusal of story narrated in both the aforesaid FIRs would indicate that offence under Section 307 IPC is not made out and the offence if any would ultimately made out under Sections 324 or 325 IPC. It is further stated that during pendency of the proceedings in issue, both the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and have entered into a compromise and a copy of compromise deed, duly signed by the parties, is annexed as Annexure No. 5 to the present application. As such, keeping in view the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in this regard, the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed. Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the trial court as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court. 3 A482 No. 8097 of 2025 Considering the aforesaid, this application is disposed of finally in following terms:- (i) The parties to the proceedings in issue shall appear and file the compromise before the concerned court within four week's from today. (ii) If the parties appear before the concerned court in terms of above, the concerned Court shall proceed to verify the compromise between the parties to the proceedings and prepare a report to the same effect and the original compromise deed be made part of record. (iii) The concerned court shall conclude the process of verification of compromise within two week's from the date of production of copy of this order. (iv) The concerned court shall permit the parties to the proceedings to obtain the certified copy of the report as well as compromise deed. (v) It shall be open to the applicant(s) to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. (vi) Office is directed to provide original compromise, if any, to the counsel for the applicant(s), after retaining its photocopy on record. It is for the purposes for its verification by the concerned court. (vii) For a period of eight weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case.""

5. The coordinate bench of this Court while referring the matter for verification has taken note of fact that as per the story narrated in the first information report indicates that the offence under section 307 of IPC is not made out rather it would ultimately made out under sections 324 and 325 of IPC.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that due to certain misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. was lodged against the applicants. He added that later on, the parties sat together and have amicably settled their disputes, which has been reduced in writing on 26.06.2025. Thereafter, the applicants filed an Application U/S 482 No.5911 of 2025 wherein this Court vide order dated 28.07.2025 has directed the trial court to verify the said compromise deed and in compliance thereof, the compromise deed was verified on 07.08.2025. He submits that now there is no dispute in between the parties and they have settled their dispute. He submits that further criminal proceedings in the instant matter would amount to harassment and, thus, the instant criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed. 4 A482 No. 8097 of 2025

7. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the opposite party no.2 has no grievance, hence, criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.

8. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the submissions aforesaid.

9. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on

26.06.2025 and said compromise has been verified on 07.08.2025 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned criminal proceedings against the applicants.

10. In view of the above, as the applicants and opposite parties have entered into compromise on 26.06.2025 and no grievance remains to be agitated and, as such, further criminal proceedings in the aforementioned criminal case are liable to be set aside in view of the Judgments of the Apex Court rendered in B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008) 9 SCC 677; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.

11. Accordingly, entire criminal proceedings against the applicants in Case Crime No. -0467/2020, U/S-147, 148, 323, 504, 307, 336, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Gosainganj, District - Lucknow registered as S.T. No. 1309/2022 and chargesheet No.-1/2020 dated 29/11/2020, are hereby quashed.

12. The compromise shall be part of this order.

13. The application is allowed accordingly.

14. Consigned to the records. September 24, 2025 Mayank (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) MAYANK PRATAP SINGH MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

1. Sri Brijendra Pratap Singh, Advocate has put in appearance by filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 and the same is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Brijendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the material placed on record.

3. By means of the instant application, the applicants have prayed to quash the chargesheet No.-1/2020 dated 29/11/2020 and quash the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. -0467/2020, U/S-147, 148, 323, 504, 307, 336, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Gosainganj, District -Lucknow registered as S.T. No. 1309 of 2022 and consequential summoning order issued against the applicants/petitioners, in view of compromise arrived at between the parties which was duly verified vide order dated 07.08.2025, through Annexure No.-5 to this affidavit, in pursuance of order dated 28.07.2025, passed by this Hon'ble Court in A-482 No. 5911 of 2025.

4. On 28.07.2025, the following order was passed:- ""Sri Brijendra Pratap Singh, Advocate, has put in appearance for the private opposite party No. 2/complainant and has filed his Vakalatnama in the Court today, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2 A482 No. 8097 of 2025 Instant application has been preferred by the applicant(s) for the following main relief(s):- "The petitioners named above most respectfully begs to submit that for the facts, reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the chargesheet No.- 1/ 2020 dated 29/11/2020 filed in Case Crime No. 0467/2020, U/S-147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307, 336, 427, 324, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Gosaiganj, District-Lucknow, as contained in Annexure No.-2, Pending in the Court of Ld. A.D.J., Court No.-16, Lucknow, registered as S.T. No.1309/2022 (State Vs. Satendra Kumar Rawat and others) and for quashing of entire proceeding of Case Crime No. 0467/2020, U/S - 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307, 336, 427, 324, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Gosaiganj, District Lucknow and consequential Summoning order dated 12.08.2021, in view of compromise arrived at between the parties in Case Crime No. 0467/2020, U/S-147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307, 336, 427, 324, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Gosaiganj, District - Lucknow as contained in as Annexure No.-3." It is stated that in the incident/altercation, which took place on 12.09.2020, persons from the both the sides sustained injuries and therefore, two FIRs i.e. FIR No. 0467/2020, basis of pending criminal proceedings, was lodged by the opposite party No. 2/Salman Husain against the applicants on 13.09.2020 at about 00.38 hours making allegations therein so as to attract the offences as indicated under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307, 336, 427 IPC & Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act at Police Station- Gosaiganj, District- Lucknow and another FIR i.e. FIR No. 0466/2020 was lodged by Lal Bahadur Pasi implicating the persons from the complainant's side of FIR in issue i.e. FIR No. 0467/2020, on 12.09.2020 at about

23.48 hours making making allegations therein so as to attract the offences as indicated under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 307, 336 IPC, 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act at Police Station- Gosaiganj, District- Lucknow. It is further stated that a perusal of story narrated in both the aforesaid FIRs would indicate that offence under Section 307 IPC is not made out and the offence if any would ultimately made out under Sections 324 or 325 IPC. It is further stated that during pendency of the proceedings in issue, both the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and have entered into a compromise and a copy of compromise deed, duly signed by the parties, is annexed as Annexure No. 5 to the present application. As such, keeping in view the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in this regard, the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed. Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the trial court as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court. 3 A482 No. 8097 of 2025 Considering the aforesaid, this application is disposed of finally in following terms:- (i) The parties to the proceedings in issue shall appear and file the compromise before the concerned court within four week's from today. (ii) If the parties appear before the concerned court in terms of above, the concerned Court shall proceed to verify the compromise between the parties to the proceedings and prepare a report to the same effect and the original compromise deed be made part of record. (iii) The concerned court shall conclude the process of verification of compromise within two week's from the date of production of copy of this order. (iv) The concerned court shall permit the parties to the proceedings to obtain the certified copy of the report as well as compromise deed. (v) It shall be open to the applicant(s) to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. (vi) Office is directed to provide original compromise, if any, to the counsel for the applicant(s), after retaining its photocopy on record. It is for the purposes for its verification by the concerned court. (vii) For a period of eight weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case.""

5. The coordinate bench of this Court while referring the matter for verification has taken note of fact that as per the story narrated in the first information report indicates that the offence under section 307 of IPC is not made out rather it would ultimately made out under sections 324 and 325 of IPC.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that due to certain misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. was lodged against the applicants. He added that later on, the parties sat together and have amicably settled their disputes, which has been reduced in writing on 26.06.2025. Thereafter, the applicants filed an Application U/S 482 No.5911 of 2025 wherein this Court vide order dated 28.07.2025 has directed the trial court to verify the said compromise deed and in compliance thereof, the compromise deed was verified on 07.08.2025. He submits that now there is no dispute in between the parties and they have settled their dispute. He submits that further criminal proceedings in the instant matter would amount to harassment and, thus, the instant criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed. 4 A482 No. 8097 of 2025

7. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the opposite party no.2 has no grievance, hence, criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.

8. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the submissions aforesaid.

9. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on

26.06.2025 and said compromise has been verified on 07.08.2025 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned criminal proceedings against the applicants.

10. In view of the above, as the applicants and opposite parties have entered into compromise on 26.06.2025 and no grievance remains to be agitated and, as such, further criminal proceedings in the aforementioned criminal case are liable to be set aside in view of the Judgments of the Apex Court rendered in B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008) 9 SCC 677; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.

11. Accordingly, entire criminal proceedings against the applicants in Case Crime No. -0467/2020, U/S-147, 148, 323, 504, 307, 336, 325 IPC & 7 of The Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Gosainganj, District - Lucknow registered as S.T. No. 1309/2022 and chargesheet No.-1/2020 dated 29/11/2020, are hereby quashed.

12. The compromise shall be part of this order.

13. The application is allowed accordingly.

14. Consigned to the records. September 24, 2025 Mayank (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) MAYANK PRATAP SINGH MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench