Ravi Alias Ravi Sonker Alias Bindu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 2365 of 2026

¶3

Ravi Alias Ravi Sonker Alias Bindu

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

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

¶7

Court No. - 13

¶8

HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.

¶9

Sri Abhishek Kumar, 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, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The instant application has been filed for quashing the impugned Charge Sheet No. 01 dated 15.07.2025 in (State Vs. Ravi Sonker @ Bindu) submitted by the investigating Officer in Case crime No.385/2025, Under Section-376 I.P.C Relating to Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Gonda and cognizance/summoning order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate Gonda passed in Session Trial Number-1704/2025 as well as charge framed by the Ld. Additional District and Session Judge / F.T.C 1st (Offences against women) Gonda on 13.03.2026.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants 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 applicant and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 25.05.2026, which has been annexed as annexure no.5 to the instant application. He next added that now there is no grievance in between the parties with each other

¶13

NA528 No. 2365 of 2026

¶14

2

¶15

and the criminal proceedings against the applicant is the futile exercise as there is no fate of trial and that is amount to harassment of the applicant and thus, the criminal proceedings against the applicant may be quashed.

¶16

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant and the criminal proceedings against the applicant 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 court below 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 the Charge Sheet No. 01 dated 15.07.2025 in (State Vs. Ravi Sonker @ Bindu) submitted by the investigating Officer in Case crime No.385/2025, Under Section-376 I.P.C Relating to Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, DistrictGonda and cognizance/summoning order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate Gonda passed in Session Trial Number-1704/2025 as well as charge framed by the Ld. Additional District and Session Judge / F.T.C 1st (Offences against women) Gonda on 13.03.2026, shall remain stayed so far as applicant is concerned.

¶22

NA528 No. 2365 of 2026

¶23

3

¶24

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 within fifteen days from the date the certified copy of this order is produced before it.

¶25

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.

¶26

(Praveen Kumar Giri,J.)

¶27

June 12, 2026

¶28

V. Sinha

¶29

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

Ravi Alias Ravi Sonker Alias Bindu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Alias Ravi Sonker Alias Bindu 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

Amir vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 4 Others

Nanhe vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Mohd.Avid Alias Avid vs State of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Lavlesh Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Sachin Alias Sachin Rawat and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Lko. and Another

Mohd. Imran Ansari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs Lko. U.P. and 2 Others