Siddharth Singh @ Chanchal and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Siddharth Singh @ Chanchal and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim order: matter to be put up as fresh on 22nd May, 2026 showing the name of Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey as counsel for opposite party no.2; parties to file the original compromise deed with an application and a certified copy of the order within two weeks for verification before the trial court; and till the next date of listing, no coercive steps to be taken against the appellants in the aforesaid criminal case. Final quashing left open pending verification of the compromise.

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge-sheet dated 4th September, 2022, the summoning order dated 18th October, 2022 and the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 1174 of 2022 can be quashed on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.

Key takeaways

The parties shall file the original compromise deed along with an application and a certified copy of the order within two weeks; the trial court shall fix a date, ensure the presence of both parties, ascertain the veracity of the compromise and, if verified, make it part of the record, prepare a report to that effect, and permit the parties to obtain a certified copy thereof to be filed before this Court.ratio¶17
The trial court shall ensure that any amount of compensation paid to the victim/complainant or parents, as the case may be, from the State exchequer is returned to the State Government before verification of the compromise, as per the law laid down in Jhabbu Dubey @ Pradeep Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. & Others, 2023 0 Supreme (All) 416.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Madan Pal Singh, J.), Criminal Appeal No. 3704 of 2026, decided April 22, 2026: Appeal filed for quashing of the charge-sheet dated 4th September, 2022, summoning order dated 18th October, 2022 and the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 1174 of 2022 (State Vs. Siddharth Singh @ Chanchal & Another), arising out of Case Crime No. 74 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 325 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (1) (da), 3 (1) (dha) and 3 (2) (va) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Rajatalab, District Varanasi, pending before the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Varanasi, on the basis of a compromise deed dated 11th February, 2026 between the appellants and opposite party no.2, quashing being sought in light of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303. Held: whether a compromise has taken place can at best be ascertained by the court where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it. Parties directed to file the original compromise deed with an application and a certified copy of the order within two weeks; the trial court to fix a date, ensure the presence of both parties, ascertain the veracity of the compromise and, if verified, make it part of the record and prepare a report, a certified copy whereof is to be filed before the High Court. Per the law in Jhabbu Dubey @ Pradeep Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. & Others, 2023 0 Supreme (All) 416, compensation, if any, paid to the victim/complainant or parents from the State exchequer is to be returned to the State Government before verification of the compromise. Interim: till the next date (22nd May, 2026), no coercive steps against the appellants.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3704 of 2026

Siddharth Singh @ Chanchal And Another

.....Appellant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Vidit Narayan Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 51

HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 by filing his vakatnama in the Court today which is taken on record.

This appeal has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 4th September, 2022, summoning order dated 18th October, 2022 as well as the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 1174 of 2022 (State Vs. Siddharth Singh @ Chanchal & Another) arising out of Case Crime No. 74 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 325 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (1) (da), 3 (1) (dha) and 3 (2) (va) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Rajatalab, DistrictVaranasi, pending in the Court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Varanasi, on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the appellants and opposite party no.2 have settled their disputes amicably and arrived at a compromise. The compromise deed dated 11th February, 2026 has also been enclosed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit accompanying the present application. It is, thus, contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab : (2012) 10 SCC 303 .

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 also does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants.

Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.

CRLA No. 3704 of 2026

2

Put up this case on 22nd May, 2026 as fresh showing the name of Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

Learned counsel for the parties undertake that they shall make original compromise deed along with an application and also a certified copy of this order within two weeks from today for verification of the aforesaid compromise before the trial court.

On receipt of the same, the trial court shall fix a date for ensuring the presence of both the parties before the trial court and thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court.

The trial court shall also ensure that the amount of compensation, if any, paid to the victim/complainant or parents, as the case may be, from the State exchequer, be returned to the State Government, before the verification of the compromise so entered into between the parties, as per the law laid down by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Jhabbu Dubey @ Pradeep Kumar Dubey Vs. State of U.P. & Others reported in 2023 0 Supreme (All) 416 .

Office is directed to send through FAX a copy of this order within 24 hours.

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the appellants in the aforesaid criminal case.

April 22, 2026 Sushil/-

(Madan Pal Singh,J.)

Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad