Allowed¶19

Abdul Hadi and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 Oct 2025CRLP/375/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR on basis of compromise between complainant and accused; Criminal Misc. Writ Petition; FIR No. 0183 of 2024 dated 21.12.2024, P.S. Bewana, District Ambedkar Nagar; Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S., 2023; Sections 3(1)(Da) & 3(1)(Dha) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2025); compromise deed dated 02.01.2025; verification by Senior Registrar (report dated 22.01.2025) pursuant to Court order dated 17.01.2025; recovery by State of victim compensation already paid; writ petition allowed; decision dated 07.10.2025; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of FIR No. 0183 of 2024 (Police Station Bewana, District Ambedkar Nagar) quashed; State permitted to recover any compensation paid by it to the victim in view of the compromise. ¶19

Abdul Hadi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Proceedings of FIR No. 0183 of 2024 (Police Station Bewana, District Ambedkar Nagar) quashed; State permitted to recover any compensation paid by it to the victim in view of the compromise.

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the first information report dated 21.12.2024, bearing No. 0183 of 2024 (Police Station Bewana, District Ambedkar Nagar), under Sections 115(2), 352 & 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3(1)(Da) & 3(1)(Dha) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2025), should be quashed, the petitioners and respondent no.4 having entered into a compromise.

¶12

Court's answer

Considering the compromise between the petitioners and respondent no.4 (verified by the Senior Registrar), this Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the proceedings of FIR No. 0183 of 2024 under Sections 115(2), 352 & 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2025), lodged at Police Station Bewana, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶19

Key takeaways

In case any compensation has been paid by the State to the victim, it is open for the State to recover the same, as the matter has been compromised between the parties.obiter¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Abdul Moin and Mrs. Babita Rani, JJ.), Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 375 of 2025, decided October 7, 2025: Allowed, and quashed the proceedings of FIR No. 0183 of 2024 dated 21.12.2024, lodged at Police Station Bewana, District Ambedkar Nagar, under Sections 115(2), 352 & 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3(1)(Da) & 3(1)(Dha) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2025), in view of the compromise deed dated 02.01.2025 between the petitioners and respondent no.4, which the Court caused to be verified by its Senior Registrar (order dated 17.01.2025; verification report dated 22.01.2025), the parties having agreed to end their dispute amicably. Further provided that any compensation paid by the State to the victim may be recovered by the State, the matter having been compromised.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 375 of 2025

¶3

Abdul Hadi And 3 Others

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Rakesh Kumar Nayak
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 11

¶10

HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents nos.1 to 3 and Sri Prem Shanker Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4.

¶12

Instant petition has been filed praying for quashing of the first information report dated 21.12.2024, bearing No. 0183 of 2024 under Sections 115(2), 352 & 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023 & Sections 3(1)(Da) & 3(1) (Dha) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2025) lodged at Police Station Bewana, District Ambedkar Nagar. Further prayer is for a mandamus commanding the respondents not to harass the petitioners in pursuance to the aforesaid FIR.

¶13

Upon filing of the petition, it was contended that the petitioners and respondent No.4 have entered into a compromise vide the compromise deed dated 02.01.2025, a copy of which is Annexure-2 to the petition.

¶14

This Court vide order dated 17.01.2025 had required the compromise deed to be placed before the learned Senior Registrar of this Court for verification of the said compromise.

¶15

In pursuance to the order of this Court dated 17.01.2025, the Senior Registrar of this Court vide his report dated 22.01.2025 has verified the compromise between the petitioners and respondent no.4.

¶16

As per the said compromise, the petitioners and respondent no.4 have agreed to end the dispute between themselves amicably.

¶17

CRLP No. 375 of 2025

¶18

¶19

Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. The proceedings of FIR No.0183 of 2024 under Sections 115(2), 352 & 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023 & Section 3(1)(Da), & 3(1) (Dha) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2025), lodged at Police Station Bewana, District Ambedkar Nagar, are hereby quashed.

¶20

It is further provided that in case any compensation has been paid by the State to the victim, it is open for the State to recover the same as the matter has been compromised between the parties.

¶21

(Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.)

¶22

October 7, 2025 Reena/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Abdul Hadi and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Hadi and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 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

Priti Devi Vs Rakesh Kumar Hans

Rohit Balmiki @ Rohit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and 2 Others

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 6 Others

Mohd. Asif vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Abdul Hadi and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Abhishek Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others