Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 122619 (ALL)

DHARMRAJ UPADHYAY AND OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND OTHERS

CRLP/1141/2025 · 2025-02-28

Brij Raj Singh, Vivek Chaudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12386-DB Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1141 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dharmraj Upadhyay And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Shukla Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary, J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite parties no.1 to 3 and Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned counsel for opposite party no.4. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of the First Information Report dated 05.11.2024 bearing Case Crime No.0616 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 131, 3(5), 324(4), 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Ram Sanehi Ghat, District Barabanki. Petitioners also pray for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings in the aforesaid case crime number. 3. On 19.02.2025, parties were directed to appear before the Senior Registrar for verification of compromise. 4. The report of the Senior Registrar of this Court dated 24.02.2025 is on record, according to which, he has verified the compromise on 24.02.2025. The original compromise is on record which has been annexed as Annexure-SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed on 19.02.2025. 5. According to the terms of the compromise, parties have decided to withdraw all the cases filed by them against each other including F.I.R. dated 05.11.2024 bearing Case Crime No.0616 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 131, 3(5), 324(4), 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Ram Sanehi Ghat, District Barabanki. 6. Learned counsel for the parties state that terms of the compromise have been read and understood and now there is no dispute between the parties. 7. Intent is clear, the informant, who is a signatory to the compromise, does not want to press the FIR, therefore, no purpose would be served in allowing the proceedings even if charge sheet has been filed before the court below to go on considering the nature of the dispute. 8. Accordingly, the impugned FIR, which is the basis to serve consequential proceedings of investigation and thereafter filing of charge sheet, if any, is hereby quashed. Consequently, all proceedings taken consequent to the lodging of the FIR including charge sheet, if any, filed before the court below stand quashed. 9. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. 10. The Senior Registrar of this Court shall communicate this order to the court concerned for correcting its record, accordingly. 11. Learned AGA shall communicate this order to the investigating officer. . (Brij Raj Singh, J.) (Vivek Chaudhary, J.) Order Date :- 28.2.2025 Rao/- Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench