Suraj Divakar @ Suraj Kumar Kanaujiya v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC15 Nov 2025A482/9630/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC application for quashing criminal proceedings based on compromise; interim stay of coercive action; direction to file compromise before trial court for verification; matter adjourned six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Interim stay of coercive action; direction to file compromise before concerned court for verification and report within specified timelines. ¶¶14

Suraj Divakar @ Suraj Kumar Kanaujiya vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9630 of 2025

¶3

Suraj Divakar @ Suraj Kumar Kanaujiya

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

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

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Bahadur Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 34

¶9

HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.

¶10

Sri Ravi Pratap Singh, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party nos. 3 and 4 which is taken on record.

¶11

Heard Sri J.B. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ravi Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 3 and 4, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

¶12

By means of the present application, the proceedings initiated by way of F.I.R. and thereafter, summoning order as well as charge sheet have been challenged.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the parties have entered into compromise, copy of which is annexed as annexure no. 4 at page no. 44 to the affidavit in support of present application. It is argued that as such the present proceedings be quashed.

¶14

Looking to the facts of the case, it is provided that the applicant shall file the said compromise within a period of two weeks from today before the court concerned who shall verify the same within two weeks thereafter and send his report to this Court.

¶15

List after six weeks.

¶16

Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in Case No. 24310 of 2019, Crime No. 289 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 328 I.P.C., Police Station Malihabad,

¶17

A482 No. 9630 of 2025

¶18

¶19

District Lucknow as well as summoning order dated 30.05.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 18, Lucknow.

¶20

Learned counsels for the parties are also at liberty to file the order of compromise through an affidavit in the present matter.

¶21

Office is directed to return the original / certified copy of the compromise, which has been annexed in the instant application, as per rules, after retaining the photocopy of the same.

¶22

(Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.)

¶23

November 15, 2025

¶24

Manoj

¶25

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

Suraj Divakar @ Suraj Kumar Kanaujiya v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Divakar @ Suraj Kumar Kanaujiya v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Anikesh Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohit (in F.I.R Mohit Singh) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Sandeep Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Anisha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Mohd. Waseem @ Vaseem vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Ran Vijay Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another