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

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8226 of 2025

¶3

Kanhaiya Pandey @ Kanhiya Pandey

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : D.P. Dutt Tiwari, Umesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 14

¶7

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶8

Sri Dharmendra Kumar Tiwari, advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing vakalatnama and counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dharmendra Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

The instant application has been filed with the prayer to quash/set aside the Impugned Charge Sheet No. 01 of 2023 dated 23.05.2023 in Crl. Case No. 13096 of 2024 arising out of First Information Report No. 0157 of 2023, under section-406, 506 of Indian Penal Code Police Station-P.G.I., District- Lucknow and entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No. 13096/2024 registered against petitioner on the basis aforesaid impugned charge sheet, pending before Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, on the basis of compromise, as continuation of the same would tantamount to gross abuse of the process of law resulting in a grave miscarriage of justice.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that under some misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise

¶12

A482 No. 8226 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

deed has been reduced in writing on 11.08.2025, which has been annexed as annexure no. 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 applicant are the futile exercise as there is no fate of trial and that is amount to harassment of the applicant and thus, the criminal proceedings against the applicant may be quashed.

¶15

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the parties have settled their dispute amicably through a compromise deed and there is no further grievance of the opposite parties against the present applicant and the criminal proceedings against the applicant may be dropped.

¶16

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

¶17

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 Court.

¶18

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 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.

¶19

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 applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶20

For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Crl. Case No. 13096 of 2024 arising out of First Information Report No. 0157 of 2023, under section-406, 506 of Indian Penal Code Police Station-P.G.I., District- Lucknow, shall

¶21

A482 No. 8226 of 2025

¶22

3

¶23

remain stayed so far as applicant is concerned.

¶24

The trial Court is directed to examine the fact that whether all the parties against whom the chargesheet was filed, the party in the compromise and in this respect, it shall also sent a report along with the verification order.

¶25

Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicant, if any, after taking the photocopy of the same.

¶26

September 23, 2025

¶27

Mayank

¶28

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

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

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