Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 196616 (ALL)

FURKAN AND 4 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS PRIN. SECY. HOME AND AFFAIRS DEPTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER

NA528/1889/2025 · 2025-11-21

Brij Raj Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1889 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Sri Surya Prakash, Advocate filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant application has been filed mainly with the prayer to quash the impugned Charge Sheet No. 410/2024 dated 02.09.2024, arising out Case Crime No. 0414/2024, lodged by the complainant/opposite party no. 2 on 06.08.2024, under sections- 115 (2), 352, 351 (3), 131, 85 of The Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, 3/4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and 3/4 of The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 at Police Station- Reusa, District- Sitapur, pending before the Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur and further be pleased to quash the impugned cognizance and summoning order dated 06.01.2025 passed by the Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur, on the basis of compromise dated 17.11.2025, executed between the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that both the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise which is said to have taken place between the parties is also filed before this Court as ANNEXURE NO. 4 to the application. 5. Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the trial court concerned as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court. 6. Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the parties concerned to appear before the trial court concerned within 2 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Surya Prakash Furkan And 4 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home And Affairs Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) weeks from today alongwith original compromise and the trial court is directed to verify the compromise within next 6 weeks. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record. 7. The court concerned in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. 8. For a period of three month, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. 9. Office is directed to return the original compromise deed, if it has been filed, to the learned counsel for the applicants, after taking the photocopy of the same. November 21, 2025 A.Nigam NA528 No. 1889 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench