Mahesh Chandra Sharma @ Mahesh Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2811 of 2026

¶3

Mahesh Chandra Sharma @ Mahesh Sharma

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vinod Kumar Pandey

¶7

Court No. - 16

¶8

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶9

Mr. Vinod Kumar Pandey,Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Vinod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of the B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned Charge Sheet No.01/2020, dated 16.03.2020 well as summoning order dated 12.11.2021, in Crime No.104069/2021 (State Vs. Mahesh Sharma), in Crime No.0049/2020, Under Section 325, 504, 506 of IPC relating to Police Station -Mahanagar, DistrictLucknow.

¶12

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 due to some misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 09-02-2026, which has been annexed as annexure no. 4 to the instant

¶13

A482 No. 2811 of 2026

¶14

2

¶15

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.

¶16

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 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.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

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 applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶21

For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Charge Sheet No.01/2020, dated 16.03.2020 well as summoning order dated 12.11.2021, in Crime No.104069/2021

¶22

A482 No. 2811 of 2026

¶23

3

¶24

(State Vs. Mahesh Sharma), in Crime No.0049/2020, Under Section 325, 504, 506 of IPC relating to Police Station - Mahanagar, District-Lucknow, shall remain stayed so far as present applicant is concerned.

¶25

The trial court is further directed for ensuring the fact that all the parties against whom the chargesheet was filed are present before the trial court and a report with respect to this effect shall also be sent alongwith verification order.

¶26

Office is directed to return the copy of original compromise deed to learned counsel for the applicants within a week.

¶27

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶28

April 6, 2026 AKS

¶29

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mahesh Chandra Sharma @ Mahesh Sharma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Chandra Sharma @ Mahesh Sharma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Pradeep Kumar Alias Pradeep Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Chhotelal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Faisal Beg and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Gaya Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Mangal Prasad Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Saddam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.