Mohd. Sakir @ Shaikh Ali and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Sri Noore.eram 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 entire proceedings, arising out of FIR No.0287/2012, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 147, 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda (State Vs. Mohammad Sakir and Ors.) 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 10.09.2025, which has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the instant application. He next added that now there is no grievance in between the parties with each other and the criminal proceedings against the applicants

¶14

A482 No. 8154 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

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 nos. 2 and 3 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, arising out of FIR No.0287/2012, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 147, 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda (State Vs. Mohammad Sakir and Ors.) shall remain stayed, so far as present applicants are concerned.

¶23

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

¶24

A482 No. 8154 of 2025

¶25

3

¶26

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 before the learned trial Court.

¶28

Office is directed to return the original compromise deed, if any, to the applicants forthwith.

¶29

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶30

September 23, 2025 MVS/-

¶31

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

Mohd. Sakir @ Shaikh Ali and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Sakir @ Shaikh Ali and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Sunita Gautam and Anr. Vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Anr.

Santosh Kumar Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Anr.

Smt. Manjeet Kaur Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Ors.

Dinanath and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.and Another

Shravan Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Transport Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Kanhaiya Pandey @ Kanhiya Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another