Disposed

Kishan Pal v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2025A482/1949/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad directed the trial court to verify a compromise agreement annexed to the interim application in a POCSO case. Coercive action was stayed pending verification, and parties were listed before the Special Judge for verification.

What did the court decide?

Verification of compromise by Special Judge Court No. 2, Moradabad directed; coercive action stayed pending verification report; parties listed before Special Judge.

Kishan Pal vs State of Up and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1949 of 2024

Kishan Pal

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of Up And 3 Others

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Rupendra Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., Santosh Kumar Verma

¶9

Court No. - 89

¶10

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶11

Heard Sri R.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Santosh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 and 3 and Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State respondents.

¶12

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant and opposite party nos. 2 and 3 have entered into compromise and the same is annexed at page 57 of the memo of application. It is further submitted that initially the FIR was lodged under section 354 IPC but subsequently the chargesheet was submitted under sections 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act whereas no offence under POCSO Act is made out as the radiological age of the victim at the time of the incident was 19 years. It is further submitted that the compromise arrived at between the parties may be sent for verification to the court concerned and a direction be also issued to verify the same.

¶13

On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 and 3 have no objection to the aforesaid.

¶14

Learned AGA submits that as per his instructions, certificate of Junior High School of class VIIIth is on the case diary according to which, the victim was below 18 years of age on the date of the incident. However, he does not dispute the fact that the said certificate is neither a high-school certificate nor is the certificate of the school first attended by the victim.

¶15

In view of the above, the office is directed to send the compromise annexed at page 57 of the memo of application to the concerned court i.e. learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.2, Moradabad for its verification. The applicant and opposite party nos. 2 and 3 are directed to appear before the said Court on 29.10.2025.

¶16

Learned trial Court concerned shall verify the same and submit a report to this Court within two weeks thereafter.

¶17

A482 No. 1949 of 2024

¶18

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant may also file supplementary affidavit bringing on record the certified copy of the verification of the proceedings within the aforesaid period of two weeks.

¶20

List this case on 28.11.2025.

¶21

Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant pursuant to Special Case No. 268 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 1110 of 2020 under section 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Civil Lines, District Moradabad.

¶22

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶23

September 22, 2025 Madhurima

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kishan Pal v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishan Pal v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nadeem Khan vs State of Up Others

Deepak Agarwal and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Kirti Bhushan Singh vs State of Up 8 Others

Naved vs State of Up and 3 Others

Premveer @ Prem Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shakeel Ahmad vs State of U.P. and 3 Others