Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 125558 (ALL)

VARUN KUMAR RAWAT v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME GOVT. OF U.P. LKO. AND OTHERS

CRLP/1662/2025 · 2025-03-26

Brij Raj Singh, Vivek Chaudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17396-DB Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1662 of 2025 Petitioner :- Varun Kumar Rawat Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prateek Tewari,Sandeep Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Amitesh Mishra,Prashant Shukla Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary, J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite parties no.1 and 2 and Sri Prashant Shukla, learned counsel for opposite party no.3. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of the First Information Report No.3 of 2025, under Sections 69, 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Chinhat, District Lucknow. Petitioner also prays for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings in the aforesaid case crime number. 3. On 04.03.2025, parties were directed to appear before the Senior Registrar for verification of compromise. 4. The report of the Senior Registrar of this Court dated 07.03.2025 is on record, according to which, he has verified the compromise on 07.03.2025. The original compromise is on record which has been annexed as Annexure-SA-1 to the Supplementary Affidavit filed on 04.03.2025. 5. According to the terms of the compromise, parties have decided to withdraw all the cases filed by them against each other including FIR No.3 of 2025, under Sections 69, 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Chinhat, District Lucknow. 6. Learned counsel for the parties state that petitioner and the complainant have married on 10.01.2025 in Arya Samaj Mandir, Lucknow in presence of the parents and now they are living as husband and wife and there is no dispute between them. 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 :- 26.3.2025 Rao/- Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench