Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 124658 (ALL)

PANKAJ KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME U.P. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS

CRLP/1498/2025 · 2025-02-27

Brij Raj Singh, Vivek Chaudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11903-DB Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1498 of 2025 Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ashish Raman Mishra Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary, J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh, J. 1. Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar holding brief of Sri Suresh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite parties no.1 and 2 and Sri Ashish Raman Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.3. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of the First Information Report dated 11.12.2024 bearing Case Crime No.251 of 2024, under Sections 376 ad 506 IPC, Police Station Amethi, District Amethi. Petitioner also prays 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-4 to the writ petition. 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 11.12.2024 bearing Case Crime No.251 of 2024, under Sections 376 ad 506 IPC, Police Station Amethi, District Amethi. 6. Learned counsel for the parties state that in terms of the compromise, petitioner got married with opposite party no.3 in a temple in presence of their parents and relatives on 19.12.2024. 7. Intent is clear, the informant-"X", 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 :- 27.2.2025 Rao/- Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench