Manoj Kumar Nishad @ Manoj Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2446 of 2026

Manoj Kumar Nishad @ Manoj Kumar And Another

noer	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko. And Another	Deptt. Of Home .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Vineet Kumar Chaurasia : G.A., Praveen Kumar Singh

¶5

Court No. - 16

¶6

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶7

Sri Praveen Kumar Singh, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 and the same is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Praveen Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 , learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

The instant application has been filed for quashing the impugned chargesheet No. 01 of 2023 dated 08.07.2023 and the consequential summoning order dated 29.01.2024, along with the entire criminal proceedings of Session Case No. 294 of 2024 (State of U.P. Vs. Manoj Nishad & others), arising out of FIR No.0261 of 2023, Under Sections-323, 504 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) of the SC/ST Act, at Police Station Gangaghat, District-Lucknow, pending before the Learned Court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.2, Unnao, in terms of the compromise deed dated 06.2.2026.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that under some misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicants and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 06.03.2026,

¶11

A482 No. 2446 of 2026

¶12

2

¶13

which has been annexed as annexure no.4 to the instant application. He next added that now there is no grievance in between the parties with each other and the criminal proceedings against the applicants are the futile exercise as there is no fate of trial and that is amount to harassment of the applicants and thus, the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶14

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that the parties have settled their dispute amicably through a compromise deed and there is no further grievance of the opposite parties against the present applicants and the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.

¶16

Now whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the court below as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.

¶17

Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record.

¶18

The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶19

For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of the impugned charge-sheet No. 01 of 2023 dated 08.07.2023 and the consequential summoning order dated 29.01.2024, along with the entire criminal proceedings of Session Case No. 294 of 2024 (State of U.P. Vs. Manoj Nishad & others), arising out of FIR No.0261 of 2023, Under Sections-323, 504 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) of the SC/ST Act, at Police Station Gangaghat, District-Lucknow, pending before

¶20

A482 No. 2446 of 2026

¶21

3

¶22

the Learned Court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.2, Unnao,, shall remain stayed so far as applicants are concerned.

¶23

The trial Court is directed to examine the fact that whether all the parties against whom the charge-sheet was filed, the party in the compromise and in this respect, it shall also sent a report along with the verification order.

¶24

Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicant, if any, after taking the photocopy of the same.

¶25

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶26

March 25, 2026

¶27

V. Sinha

¶28

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Manoj Kumar Nishad @ Manoj Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Nishad @ Manoj Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

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

Similar cases

Vandana Singh vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ashish Kumar Sonkar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Bajrang Alias Bajrang Goswami and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Asheesh Tiwari and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vikash and 3 others vs State of U.P. through Addl. Principal Secretary Home and 4 others

Chandra Bali Singh @ Chandra Bali and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. the Addl. Chief Secy. Govt. of U.P. Lko.