Haridwar and 9 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Haridwar and 9 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application not finally disposed; deferred to 26.05.2025 (top 20 cases). Parties directed to appear before the trial court and file a compromise application within two weeks for verification, failing which process continues. Interim relief granted: no coercive action against the applicants till the next date of listing.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings, including the summoning order dated 28.04.2007, of Complaint Case No. 394 of 2006 (Shyamji Vs. Radheshyam and others) may be quashed on the basis of the alleged compromise between the parties.

Court's answer

Whether a compromise has taken place or not can best be ascertained by the court where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.

Ratio / Principle

If the parties appear before the trial court and file an appropriate application for compromise within two weeks, the compromise shall be verified by the court concerned in accordance with law; if verified, it shall be made part of the record, a report prepared (with certified copy available to the parties to file before this Court by the next date), and the trial court shall send the verification report to this Court.

Key takeaways

As interim protection, till the next date of listing (fixed as 26.05.2025), no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application under Section 528 BNSS (No. 13945 of 2025, Allahabad High Court, Raj Beer Singh, J., order dated 23.4.2025) for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings, including the summoning order dated 28.04.2007, of Complaint Case No. 394 of 2006 (Shyamji Vs. Radheshyam and others) under Sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Shahabganj, District- Chandauli, pending before the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Chakiya, Chandauli, on the ground that the parties have amicably settled the private dispute and compromised the matter. The Court held that whether a compromise has taken place can best be ascertained by the court where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it. Accordingly, the parties were directed to appear before the trial court and file an appropriate compromise application within two weeks; upon verification in accordance with law, the trial court was to make the compromise part of the record, prepare a report, allow certified copies to be filed before the High Court by the next date, and send the verification report to the High Court. Interim direction: no coercive action against the applicants till the next date of listing fixed as 26.05.2025 (within top 20 cases).

Court No. - 71

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 13945 of 2025

Applicant :- Haridwar And 9 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

Sri Dileep Singh Yadav, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State.

This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings, including summoning order dated 28.04.2007, of Complaint Case No. 394 of 2006 (Shyamji Vs. Radheshyam and others), under Sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Shahabganj, District- Chandauli, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Chakiya, Chandauli.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that matter relates to private dispute between the parties and both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter hence, the impugned proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise.

Whether a compromise has taken place or not can best be ascertained by the court where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.

In view of the aforesaid it is directed that in case the parties

appear before the trial Court and file an appropriate application for compromise within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be verified by the court concerned in accordance with law and if the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court by the next date. In case such a compromise is verified, the trial Court concerned shall send the report of verification to this Court.

List this case on 26.05.2025 within top 20 cases.

It is directed that till the next date of listing, no coercive action would be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

Order Date :- 23.4.2025 'SP'/-

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad