Ramu Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ramu Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of with directions: both parties to appear before the court concerned on 27.03.2026 and file their compromise application; on filing, notices to all signatories and verification of the compromise within six weeks, with a report to this Court; certified copies of the report and compromise to be made available; liberty to the applicant to approach this Court again for quashing if the compromise is verified; no coercive action against the applicants for three months; original compromise deed to be returned to counsel after retaining a photocopy.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No.1008 of 2025 arising out of Crime No.185 of 2025 and the summoning order dated 04.10.2025 should be quashed in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. +1 more

Court's answer

The application is disposed of with a direction to both parties to appear before the court concerned on 27.03.2026 and file their compromise application.

Ratio / Principle

Whether the parties have in fact compromised the matter can best be ascertained by the trial court, as such a compromise has to be duly verified in the presence of the parties before the court concerned.

Key takeaways

On filing of the compromise application, the court concerned shall issue notices to all signatories requiring personal presence and verify the compromise within six weeks; if verified, a report shall be prepared making the compromise part of the record and sent to this Court; parties may obtain certified copies of the report and compromise; and it will be open to the applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.ratio¶17
For a period of three months, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.ratio¶18
Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the counsel for the applicant(s) after retaining a photocopy of the same on record (administrative direction).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Brij Raj Singh, J. — Application under Section 528 BNSS by Ramu Singh seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No.1008 of 2025 (arising out of Crime No.185 of 2025 under Sections 75, 352, 351(3), 76 and 115(2) of BNS, 2023, P.S. Asiwan, District Unnao) and the summoning order dated 04.10.2025 passed by the Civil Judge (JD) FTC (CAW), Unnao. Counsel for both sides stated that the parties had amicably settled the dispute by a compromise deed dated 16.02.2026 (Annexure-6). The Court held that whether the parties have in fact compromised the matter can best be ascertained by the trial court, as a compromise has to be duly verified in the presence of the parties before the court concerned. The application was disposed of with directions to both parties to appear before the trial court on 27.03.2026 and file a compromise application; on such filing, notices were to issue to all signatories requiring personal presence and the compromise was to be verified within six weeks, with a report to the High Court; certified copies of the report and compromise were to be made available; and it was left open to the applicant to approach the High Court again for quashing if the compromise stood verified. For three months no coercive action was to be taken against the applicants. Office was directed to return the original compromise deed to counsel after retaining a photocopy on record.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1059 of 2026

Ramu Singh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gulam Mustafa Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 16

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s), learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no.1 and Sri Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel, who has filed power on behalf of opposite parties no.2 and 3, which is taken on record.

The present application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No.1008 of 2025, arising out of Crime No.185 of 2025, under Sections 75, 352, 351(3), 76 and 115(2) of BNS, 2023, Police Station Asiwan, District Unnao and the summoning order dated 04.10.2025, pending in the court of Civil Judge (JD) FTC (CAW), Unnao.

Learned counsel for both the parties submit that parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise and the original compromise deed dated 16.02.2026 filed as Annexure-6 to the application, therefore, the aforesaid case may be decided in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

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 before the court concerned.

Accordingly, the present application is disposed of with a direction to b oth the parties to appear before the court concerned on 27.03.2026 and file their comprise application. If such compromise application is filed, the court concerned shall issue notices to all the signatories to the

NA528 No. 1059 of 2026

2

compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise within six weeks from that date. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court making compromise to be part of the record and a report to that effect shall also be send to this Court whether the said compromise took place or not. The court concerned will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise. It will also be open to the applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

For a period of three months, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the counsel for the applicant(s) after retaining a photocopy of the same on record.

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

March 17, 2026

Rao/-

Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench