Sameer Kumar Srivastava and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Heard Sri Anuj Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Dhananjai Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.4.

¶12

This petition has been filed challenging an F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.0105/2025, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Shridattganj, District Balrampur.

¶13

This Court had passed the following order on 26.11.2025:-

¶14

"1. Heard Sri Katyan Mishra, holding brief of Sri Anuj Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, holding brief of Sri Dhananjai Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.4.

¶15

2. The parties have entered into compromise, which is placed on record, therefore, vide order dated 10.11.2025, this Court had directed the parties to appear before the learned Senior Registrar of this Court for verification of the compromise. However, the same could not be verified because each and every page of the compromise deed was not signed by the parties as per report of the learned Senior Registrar dated 13.11.2025.

¶16

3. Now, the parties have filed a fresh compromise deed alongwith a

¶17

CRLP No. 10033 of 2025

¶18

2

¶19

supplementary affidavit and they pray for verification of the same for deciding the petition accordingly.

¶20

4. In view of above, the parties are directed to appear before the learned Senior Registrar of this Court on 28.11.2025 for the purpose of verification of the compromise deed and the learned Senior Registrar, after verification of the compromise deed, shall forward the report accordingly.

¶21

5. List on 04.12.2025.

¶22

6. Interim order, if any, shall continue till the next date of listing. "

¶23

In pursuance to the aforesaid order, the compromise dated 13.11.2025, which has been entered between the parties and placed on record of this petition, has been verified by the Senior Registrar of this Court in presence of the petitioners and the respondent No.4, who have admitted that they have entered into compromise on their own free will. In this regard, a report dated 28.11.2025 of the Senior Registrar of this Court is also annexed with the order sheet of this writ petition.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the parties have entered into compromise and the same has been verified by the Senior Registrar of this Court, therefore, the proceedings arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.0105/2025, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Shridattganj, District Balrampur may be quashed as no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the same pending.

¶25

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the respondent No.4 do not dispute the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioners. Even otherwise learned counsel for the respondent No.4/informant submits that since the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court, the respondent No.4 does not want to pursue the prosecution in pursuance to the impugned F.I.R. and the same may be quashed.

¶26

Learned counsel for the parties have also placed reliance upon the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of State

¶27

CRLP No. 10033 of 2025

¶28

3

¶29

of Haryana and Others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others; 1992 SCC (Crl.)426, Dimpey Gujral and Others Vs. Union Territory Through Administrator; 2013 (11) SCC 497, Narendra Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Others; 2014 (6) SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav And Others Vs. State of Jharkhand; 2014 (9) SCC 653 .

¶30

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above referred judgments as well as in view of the statement/compromise made by the petitioners as well as the respondent No.4 and the compromise verification report dated 28.11.2025 of the Senior Registrar of this Court, by means of which the compromise entered between the parties has been verified in presence of the parties and the fact that the dispute is a personal dispute which is not going to affect in any manner the society at large and also that since the parties have entered into compromise and the respondent No.4 does not want to prosecute the petitioners, there are very weak chances of conviction, the impugned F.I.R. lodged vide Case Crime No.0105/2025, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Shridattganj, District Balrampur is hereby quashed so far as it relates to the instant petitioners.

¶31

Accordingly, the instant writ petition is allowed and the compromise entered between the parties shall be part of this order.

¶32

(Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.)

¶33

December 9, 2025 Shahnaz

¶34

Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sameer Kumar Srivastava and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer Kumar Srivastava and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anjana Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Others

Xyz (Minor ) in Fir Case Crime NO.-154/ 2024 Thru. Her Mother/Complainant and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. and Others

Jameel Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Lakshmi Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home/Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Rahul Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home/Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. vs Sharik and 7 Others