Disposed

Anuj Kumar Singh @ Anuj Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2025A482/9016/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought quashing of a summoning order and charge-sheet under IPC sections 323, 342, 504, 506 and SC/ST Act section 3(2)(Va), citing a compromise between the parties. The Court directed verification of the compromise by the trial court within fixed timelines and granted interim protection from coercive action for eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Parties to appear before trial court within six weeks to have compromise verified; no coercive action against applicant for eight weeks; liberty to approach this Court again for quashing.

Anuj Kumar Singh @ Anuj Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9016 of 2025

¶3

Anuj Kumar Singh @ Anuj Pratap Singh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dilip Kumar Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 13

¶8

HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

¶9

Ms. Smita Singh, learned Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s), learned Counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The instant application has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶12

"WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned summoning order dated 29-3-2023 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST Act-Lucknow who taking cognizance on the charge-sheet dated 30-01-2023 submitted under section 323,342,504,506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(Va) SC/ST Act against the applicant in FIR No. 400 of 2022 lodged at Police Station-Bakshi Ka Talab, District-Lucknow summoned the applicant for facing taril in aforesaid section's as well as entire proceedings of aforesaid Session trail No. 1402 of 2023 (State Vs Anuj Kumar Singh) which is pending before the learned special Judge SC/ST Act-Lucknow and further be pleased to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 30-01-2023 submitted under section 323,342,504,506 1.P.C. and 3(2)(Va) SC/ST Act against the applicant which are contained as Annexure No. 1&2 respectively to this petition, in the interest of justice."

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant(s) submitted that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and have entered into a compromise. As such, keeping in view the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in this

¶14

A482 No. 9016 of 2025

¶15

¶16

regard, the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed.

¶17

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

Considering the aforesaid, the instant application is disposed of finally in following terms:-

¶19

(i) The parties to the proceedings i.e. Session trial No. 1402 of 2023 (supra), shall appear before the concerned Court within six weeks' from today and file the compromise.

¶20

(ii) If the parties appear before the concerned Court in terms of above, the concerned Court shall proceed to verify the compromise between the parties to the proceedings and prepare a report to the same effect and the original compromise deed be made part of record.

¶21

(iii) The concerned Court shall conclude the process of verification of compromise within two weeks' from the date of production of copy of this order.

¶22

(iv) The concerned Court shall permit the parties to the proceedings to obtain the certified copy of the report as well as compromise deed.

¶23

(v) It shall be open to the applicant(s) to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶24

(vi) Office is directed to provide original compromise, if any, to the Counsel for the applicant(s), after retaining its photocopy on record. It is for the purposes for its verification by the concerned court.

¶25

(vii) For a period of eight weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case.

¶26

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

¶27

October 17, 2025

¶28

Jyoti/-

¶29

Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anuj Kumar Singh @ Anuj Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Kumar Singh @ Anuj Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

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

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Ram Avadh vs Kumar Vineet, Managing Director U.P. Cooperative Sugar Factories Federation Ltd. Lko. and Another

Shabana Khtoon Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 14 Others

Anuj Kumar Singh @ Anuj Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Afzal Ahmad and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ibrahim @ Baba vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko