Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:36469 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6088 of 2025 Applicant :- Jamal Ahmad And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Furquan Ahmad (Alvi) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Shri Furquan Ahmad (Alvi), learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Jyoti Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 2. In view of the order, which is being proposed to be passed today, notices are not being issued to the opposite party No. 2. 3. This application under Section 482 Cr.PC. has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 437 of 2015 (State Vs. Jamal Ahmad), arising out of case crime no.2050 of 2014, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 506 IPC Police Station- Kotwali Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that an FIR stood lodged post invoking of the proceedings under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. by the original first informant, Akhtar Alam against the applicants, namely, Jamal Ahmad son of Late Abdul Jabbar, Abdul Rahem son of Abdul Lateef and Abdul Kaiyuum son of Abdul Lateef, under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 506 IPC being case crime no. 2050 of 2014 and case no. 389 of 2014 on 23.12.2014 relatable to the commission of the offence on 30.06.2014 with an allegation that the original first informant, Akhtar Alam had seven brothers being the applicant no.1, Jamal Ahmad, Kamal Ahmad, Saqeel Ahmad, Jameel Ahmad, Afroj Alam and Aftab Alam who were having one share each. However, the applicant no. 1 who happens to be the real brothers executed the sale deed in favour of the applicant nos. 2 and 3 on 30.06.2014 and as per the first information report version, the execution of the sale deed was beyond the share which was owned by the owner of the land in question. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the original first informant, Akhtar Alam expired on 23.11.2014 and there happens to be a statement of the son of the original first informant, Akhtar Alam being Mahmood Alam which is Annexure 3 at page 27 of the paper-book, reference whereof has been made in para-9 of the application. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that though a charge-sheet stood submitted on 31.12.2014 but the parties have themselves compromised on 06.02.2025 (Annexure-5 at page 39) and onwards reference whereof has been made in paragraph no. 13 of the application. He submits that the compromise application has been filed before the court below and interregnum period, subject to verification, in the meantime, till the verification is done, interim protection be accorded. 5. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that though original first informant stood expired but a statement happens to be the real son of the opposite party no. 2 which is at page 27 of the paper book. He submits that once the parties have entered into compromise, let the same be verified. 6. Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken by them, the application stands disposed of directing the applicants to approach the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar while filing a self-attested copy of the present application and certified copy of the order of this Court passed today and on the receipt of the same shall undertake the exercise of verification and process be concluded in the last week of May, 2025. The Court below while verifying the compromise shall also take into note the identity of the Mahmood Alam who is stated to be the son of the original informant. 7. Till the disposal of the compromise application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in pursuance of Case No. 437 of 2015 (State Vs. Jamal Ahmad), arising out of case crime no.2050 of 2014, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 506 IPC Police Station- Kotwali Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar. 7. The protection so accorded by this order shall only be available in those contingencies wherein the applicants stick to the time-line and does not violate any of the conditions of the order and in the event of default of any of the conditions by the applicants as referred to above, the interim protection shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench. 8. It is always open for the applicants to take legal recourse, subject to the fate and the outcome of the compromise. Order Date :- 12.3.2025 A. Prajapati Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad