SACHENDRA KUMAR TIWARI AND 5 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
CRLP/9946/2024 · 2025-01-17
Om Prakash Shukla, Vivek Chaudhary
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 170668 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 170668 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3116-DB Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9946 of 2024 Petitioner :- Sachendra Kumar Tiwari And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anoop Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Mulayam Singh Yadav Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Mulayam Singh Yadav, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of the F.I.R. dated 22.06.2017 bearing Case Crime No.624 of 2017, under Sections 506, 504, 323, 498-A, 313 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Madiyaon, District Lucknow. Petitioners also pray for quashing of entire criminal proceeding in the aforesaid case crime number.
3. On 20.12.2024, parties were directed to appear before the Senior Registrar for verification of compromise.
4. The report of the Senior Registrar of this Court dated 13.01.2025 is on record, according to which, he has verified the compromise on 13.01.2025. The original compromise is on record which has been annexed as Annexure-3 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 22.06.2017 bearing Case Crime No.624 of 2017, under Sections 506, 504, 323, 498-A, 313 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Madiyaon, District Lucknow..
6. Learned counsel for the parties state that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and the respondent No.4 does not want to pursue this criminal case against the petitioners.
7. Intent is clear, the informant/complainant-Sindhuja Bajpai,
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. [Om Prakash Shukla, J.] [Vivek Chaudhary, J.]
Order Date :- 17.1.2025 -Piyush- Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench