Disposed

Ram Prasad and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC17 Sept 2025A482/2445/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Common High Court disposed of two applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings for cheating due to an alleged settlement. The court directed the trial court to verify the compromise deed if filed. Pending such verification, criminal proceedings were stayed for three months.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings stayed for three months; direction to lower court to verify compromise deed if filed.

Ram Prasad and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2445 of 2017

¶3

Ram Prasad And Anr.

¶4

.....Applicant(s) Versus State Of U.P. And Anr. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajendra Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Govt. Advocate, Vineet Mishra

¶5

[Alongwith]

¶6

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2292 of 2017

¶7

Veerpal

¶8

	.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State Of U.P. And Anr.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Rajendra Singh Chauhan : Govt. Advocate, Vineet Mishra
Court No.- 14

¶9

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶10

Since both the cases arise out of same case crime number, they are being disposed of by a common order.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Vineet Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

¶12

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the chargesheet No. 01 of 2015, dated 31.12.2025 in Case No. 506 of 2017; State Vs. Ram Prasad and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 0316 of 2015, under Sections 419/420 IPC, Police Station Purwa, District Unnao and summoning order dated 27.03.2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate,

¶13

A482 No. 2445 of 2017

¶14

¶15

Purwa, District Unnao, as well as entire proceedings in pursuance thereof.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that due to some misunderstanding, the instant FIR has been lodged against the applicants and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 21.05.2025, which has been annexed as Annexure No. SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit dated 10.07.2025 filed in Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 2445 of 2017. 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 is amount to harassment of the applicants and thus, the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶17

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 party no. 2 against the present applicants and the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.

¶18

Learned AGA appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.

¶19

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.

¶20

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 deed, requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the same. 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.

¶21

A482 No. 2445 of 2017

¶22

¶23

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.

¶24

For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Case No. 506 of 2017; State Vs. Ram Prasad and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 0316 of 2015, under Sections 419/420 IPC, Police Station Purwa, District Unnao, shall remain stayed, so far as present applicants are concerned.

¶25

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.

¶26

Office is directed to return back the original compromise deed dated 21.05.2025 to learned counsel for the applicants within a week.

¶27

September 17, 2025 kkv/

¶28

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Prasad and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Prasad and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kumari Sujata Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. and Ors.

Wajid @ Bauwa @ Bauwan and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Wasni Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Ors.

Fakeer Mohammad and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Farooque Ahmad and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Lal Bahadur and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.