Disposed

Tariq and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC2 Sept 2025A482/7347/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash a charge-sheet, summoning order and trial proceedings on the basis of a written compromise between the parties. The court disposed of the application, directing the trial court to verify the compromise with all signatories present, and stayed further proceedings for three months, leaving the applicants free to seek quashing again thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of Criminal Case No.19830/2019 stayed for three months; trial court directed to verify the compromise; applicants permitted to re-apply for quashing if verified; original compromise deed t

Tariq and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7347 of 2025

Tariq And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Tiwari, Ujjawal Tewari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 14

¶9

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶10

Sri Satyam Tiwari, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing his Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party nos. 2 and 3 and the same is taken on record.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3, as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the record.

¶12

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet no.01 dated 30.08.2018 filed in F.I.R. No.0108/2018, under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Chowk, District Lucknow, to quash the summoning order dated 19.03.2019 and to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.19830/2019 (725/19) (State Vs. Tariq and another), pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (C.B.I./A.P.), Lucknow on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement/compromise.

¶13

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 F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicants and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 16.07.2025, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the instant

¶14

A482 No. 7347 of 2025

¶15

¶16

application. He submits that the applicants have filed original copy of the compromise deed before the learned trial Court. 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 the compromise deed and there is no further grievance of the opposite parties against the present applicants and the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.

¶18

Learned A.G.A. 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 trial Court as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the trial Court.

¶20

Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. 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

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.

¶22

For a period of three months, the further proceedings of Criminal Case No.19830/2019 (725/19) (State Vs. Tariq and another), pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (C.B.I./A.P.), Lucknow shall remain stayed.

¶23

The trial court is further directed for ensuring the fact that all the parties

¶24

A482 No. 7347 of 2025

¶25

¶26

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.

¶27

The applicants are directed to produce the original compromise deed dated 16.07.2025 before the learned trial Court.

¶28

Office is directed to return the original compromise deed, if any, to the applicants within a week.

¶29

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶30

September 2, 2025

¶31

MVS/-

¶32

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Tariq and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tariq and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mahesh Kumar Tiwari @ Manish Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another

Balbeer Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Ram Singar Vs the State of U.P and Ors.

Chandrika Prasad Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 2 Others

Vipin Kumar and Another Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Yogendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another