Disposed¶23

Abdul Sagir and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2025NA528/32830/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of charge sheet and cognizance order on basis of compromise; verification of compromise deed by trial court; Application under Section 528 BNSS; Case Crime No. 243 of 2016; Sections 420, 380, 323, 504, 506 IPC; P.S. Izat Nagar, District Bareilly; interim stay of criminal proceedings; Nikhil Merchant (2008) 9 SCC 677; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; Allahabad High Court interim order.

What did the court decide?

Interim relief granted: further proceedings of Case No. 216 of 2017 shall remain stayed till the next date of listing; final disposal of the quashing application deferred pending counter affidavit and verification of the compromise. ¶23

Abdul Sagir and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet dated 27.07.2016, the cognizance order dated 30.01.2017 and the entire proceedings of Case No. 216 of 2017 (arising out of Case Crime No. 243 of 2016) may be quashed / proceedings dropped in view of the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶13

Court's answer

Considering the nature of the allegations levelled in the FIR and the compromise entered into between the parties, and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nikhil Merchant (2008) 9 SCC 677 and Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303, a prima facie case for grant of interim relief stands made out.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

Further proceedings of the aforesaid case (Case No. 216 of 2017) shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.

¶23

Key takeaways

The court concerned shall call upon the parties to the compromise lying in original on its record, and the original compromise shall be duly verified in the presence of the parties and their respective counsel on or before 20.10.2025.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No. 48; Kshitij Shailendra, J.), interim order dated 09-09-2025 in Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 32830 of 2025 filed by Abdul Sagir and 3 others seeking quashing of the charge sheet dated 27.07.2016, cognizance order dated 30.01.2017 and the entire proceedings of Case No. 216 of 2017 (State vs Abdul Sagir and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 243 of 2016 under Sections 420, 380, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Izat Nagar, District Bareilly, on the strength of a compromise filed before the trial court on which no order had been passed. Relying on Nikhil Merchant vs CBI (2008) 9 SCC 677 and Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Court found a prima facie case for interim relief, directed verification of the original compromise before the court concerned in the presence of the parties and counsel on or before 20.10.2025, and stayed further proceedings till the next date of listing.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32830 of 2025

¶3

Abdul Sagir and 3 others

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P. and another

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Abad Ali Tyagi, Gurfan Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 48

¶10

HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶12

This instant application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed seeking quashing of the charge sheet dated 27.07.2016, cognizance order dated 30.01.2017 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 216 of 2017 (State Vs. Abdul Sagir and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 243 of 2016, under Sections 420, 380, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Izat Nagar, District Bareilly.

¶13

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants, by referring to Annexure No. 4 to the affidavit, submits that an original compromise entered into between the parties has been filed before the court concerned but no order has been passed either way, although certain applications have been filed requesting dropping of proceedings based upon the compromise. It is, therefore, prayed that the compromise may be got verified and appropriate orders may be passed.

¶14

Considering the nature of allegations levelled in the FIR and the compromise entered into between the parties and in view of the laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another: (2008) 9 SCC 677 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another: (2012) 10 SCC 303 , a prima facie case for grant of interim relief stands made out.

¶15

Issue notice to opposite party no. 2.

¶16

NA528 No. 32830 of 2025

¶17

¶18

The opposite parties may file counter affidavit within a period of four weeks from today.

¶19

The applicant is directed to file a copy of this order along with photostat copy of the compromise before the court concerned within two weeks from today.

¶20

On receipt of the said documents, the court concerned shall call upon the parties to the compromise (Annexure-4 to the affidavit), which is lying in original on his record, and original compromise shall be duly verified in the presence of the parties as well as their respective counsel on or before 20.10.2025 .

¶21