Nitin Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another
Case brief
What is this about?
Hearings regarding post-compromise stay in a criminal case involving Section 363 IPC. Court noted settlement and directed verification before lifting stay.
What did the court decide?
Stay of criminal proceedings until verification of compromise is complete.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 43559 of 2025
Nitin Kumar
| Versus | .....Applicant(s) |
|---|---|
| State of U.P. and Another | .....Opposite Party(s) |
| Counsel for Applicant(s) | : Sunil Kumar Tiwari |
| Counsel for Opposite Party(s) | : G.A. |
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.
Learned counsel for both the parties submitted that parties settled their dispute arising out of offence punishable under Section 363 of I.P.C. on the basis of compromise dated 18.10.2025. Original compromise is Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit dated 06.11.2025. As per statement of the victim there is no pre summoning evidence with regard to the offence as alleged against the applicant.
Office is directed to send the same to court concerned for verification immediately after retaining a photocopy of the same.
Both the parties are directed to appear before the court concerned for verification of compromise within three weeks from today.
Court concerned is directed to verify the same.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Nitin Kumar
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- NA528/43559/2025
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court