Shubham Pareek vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shubham Pareek vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No final relief on the quashing application; directions issued - certified copy of the order to be sent to the trial court for clarification and explanation regarding cursory orders; learned Sessions Judge, Allahabad to call for explanation from the officer concerned and submit a report by 24.02.2026; matter listed on 24.02.2026 at 2:00 P.M.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 212 of 2021 (State vs. Shubham Pareek and others), the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 29.07.2021 and the charge sheet dated 22.10.02020 arising out of Case Crime No. 127 of 2020 should be quashed. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The compromise verification order dated 29.09.2025 passed by the trial court is prima facie not a complete order; it was passed in a casual manner without mentioning the details of the case, the complete particulars including the provisions under which the case is being tried, or the names of the parties, and it appears the learned court below was in a hurry or may have failed to apply its judicial mind.

Key takeaways

A certified copy of this order is to be sent to the learned trial court for clarification at the first instance and also to explain why such cursory orders are being passed.ratio¶18
The learned Sessions Judge, Allahabad is directed to call for an explanation from the officer concerned and submit his own report to this Court within a week, i.e. by 24.02.2026.ratio¶19
The case is to be put up on 24.02.2026 at 2:00 P.M. for further orders along with the report submitted by the trial court; the quashing prayer itself was not decided at this stage.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Tej Pratap Tiwari, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 51591 of 2025, Shubham Pareek v. State of U.P. and Another, decided 16.02.2026: The applicant sought quashing of the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 212 of 2021 (State vs. Shubham Pareek and others), the cognizance/summoning order dated 29.07.2021 and the charge sheet dated 22.10.02020 arising out of Case Crime No. 127 of 2020 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mutthiganj, District Prayagraj, pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad. Counsel stated that pursuant to this Court's order dated 18.03.2025 in Criminal Misc. Application 482 Cr.P.C. No. 614 of 2025, the parties filed a compromise which the trial court verified vide order dated 29.09.2025. Examining that verification order, the Court found it prima facie not a complete order, passed in a casual manner without mentioning the details of the case, the complete particulars including the provisions under which the case is tried, or the names of the parties, observing that the court below appeared to have been in a hurry or to have failed to apply its judicial mind. The Court directed that a certified copy of its order be sent to the trial court for clarification and to explain why such cursory orders were being passed; directed the learned Sessions Judge, Allahabad to call for an explanation from the officer concerned and submit a report within a week, i.e. by 24.02.2026; and listed the matter for 24.02.2026 at 2:00 P.M. along with that report. The quashing prayer was not decided at this stage.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 51591 of 2025

Shubham Pareek

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sandeep Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 79

HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.

Heard Sri Sandeep Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

The instant application has been filed by applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 212 of 2021 (State vs. Shubham Pareek and others) and impugned cognizance / summoning order dated 29.07.2021 as well as charge sheet dated 22.10.02020 arising out of Case Crime No. 127 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mutthiganj, District Prayagraj, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant contended that in pursuance of the order dated 18.03.2025 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application 482 Cr.P.C. No. 614 of 2025 (Shubham Pareek vs. State of U.P. and another), the parties have filed the compromise before the learned court below for verification. Learned trial court, vide order dated 29.09.2025, has verified the compromise.

Looking to the order of the compromise verification dated 29.09.2025, prima facie it looks that the aforesaid order is not a complete order. It is indeed unfortunate that the Presiding Officer of the learned trial court has passed the order in such a casual manner without mentioning the details of the case in which the compromise has been filed, as well as the complete particulars of the case, including the provisions under which the case is being tried. Moreover, the names of the parties have also not been mentioned in the order. It appears as if the learned court below was in a hurry or might

NA528 No. 51591 of 2025

2

have failed to apply its judicial mind while passing the order in question.

Let a certified copy of this order be sent to the learned trial court for clarification at the first instance and also to explain as to why such cursory orders are being passed.

The learned Sessions Judge, Allahabad is directed to call for an explanation from Officer concerned and submit its own report to this Court within a week i.e. 24.02.2026.

Put up this case on 24.02.2026 at 2:00 P.M. for further order along with the report submitted by the trial court.

February 16, 2026 Manoj

(Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.)

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad