Sandeep Manwal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sandeep Manwal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim relief only: notice issued to opposite party no. 2 with counter affidavits within three weeks and rejoinder within a week thereafter; proceedings of FIR/Case Crime No. 02/2002 (Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 IPC, P.S. Sahadatganj, District Lucknow) stayed so far as the applicant is concerned till the next date of listing. The quashing prayer remains undecided; matter to be listed thereafter.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 940/2012 (State Vs. Sandeep Manwal), together with the summoning order and order of cognizance dated 15.03.2002 and the charge sheet dated 04.07.2002 arising out of Case Crime No. 02/2002 under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 IPC, P.S. Sahadatganj, District Lucknow, are liable to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., in view of the applicant's contention that criminal proceedings were agreed to be withdrawn under the settlement agreement dated 17.04.2012, wherein the present FIR was inadvertently omitted.

Court's answer

The Court held that the matter requires consideration and issued notice to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date, directing the learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 to file counter affidavits within three weeks, rejoinder affidavit, if any, within a week thereafter, and listed the matter thereafter.

Ratio / Principle

As an interim measure, till the next date of listing, the proceedings of FIR/Case Crime No. 02/2002 under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 IPC, Police Station Sahadatganj, District Lucknow shall remain stayed so far as the applicant is concerned.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Interim order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. — Sandeep Manwal sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 940/2012 (State Vs. Sandeep Manwal), the summoning order and order of cognizance dated 15.03.2002 and the charge sheet dated 04.07.2002 arising out of Case Crime No. 02/2002 under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 IPC, Police Station Sahadatganj, District Lucknow, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, ATS-I, Lucknow. Applicant contended that criminal proceedings were agreed to be withdrawn by the opposite parties under a settlement agreement dated 17.04.2012, but the present FIR (pertaining to year 2001) was inadvertently omitted from being specifically mentioned therein, causing undue hardship; the State opposed. Held (Shree Prakash Singh, J.): matter requires consideration; notice issued to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date; counter affidavits within three weeks and rejoinder, if any, within a week thereafter; until the next date of listing, the proceedings of Case Crime No. 02/2002 shall remain stayed so far as the applicant is concerned. Quashing prayer left open.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4328 of 2025

Sandeep Manwal

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Alok Singh : G.A.

Court No. - 16

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and the material placed on record.

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with prayer for quashing of the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 940/2012 (State Vs. Sandeep Manwal), and the impugned summoning order and order of cognizance dated 15.03.2002 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, ATS-I, Lucknow and Charge Sheet dated 04.07.2002 arising out of Case Crime No. 02/2002, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 IPC, Police Station - Sahadatganj, District - Lucknow, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, ATS-I, Lucknow.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the criminal proceedings were agreed to be withdrawn by the opposite parties in terms of the settlement agreement dated 17.04.2012, though the present FIR was inadvertently left out from being specifically mentioned therein, however, the same pertains to the year 2001.

He further submits that the applicant is facing undue hardship on account of the cryptic omission in the settlement agreement dated 17.04.2012.

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contention aforesaid.

A482 No. 4328 of 2025

2

Matter requires consideration.

Let the notice be issued to the opposite party no.2 returnable at an early date.

Steps within a week.

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 may file their counter affidavits within three weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a week thereafter.

List thereafter.

Till the next date of listing, the proceedings of FIR/ Case Crime No. 02/2002, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 IPC, Police Station - Sahadatganj, District - Lucknow shall remain stayed, so far as the applicant is concerned.

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

April 7, 2026

Raj

Digitally signed by :- RAJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench