Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86392-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10426 of 2025 Petitioner :- Pankaj Gupta And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-X,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri P.K. Jaiswal, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and Shri Ashish Kumar, learned counsel for the informant. 2. The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 31.05.2024 registered as Case Crime No. 028 of 2024 under sections 147, 457, 380, 452, 323, 427, 506 of the IPC at Police Station Atarsuiya, District Prayagraj and with a further prayer not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R. 3. The impugned FIR was registered based on a complaint filed by the informant alleging that on 27.05.2024, the accused persons broke the lock of her house and entered illegally, stealing household items. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned order is liable to be quashed as it is based on false, frivolous, and concocted allegations arising out of a civil property dispute that has already been amicably resolved between the parties. The learned counsel contends that the first petitioner is the co-owner of the ancestral property situated at Mohalla Dariyabad along with his mother, and a mutual partition had taken place in the house due to family disputes. After the death of the petitioner's father on 18.12.2021, the petitioner shifted from the ancestral house to resolve the mother-in-law and daughter-in-law dispute while continuing to look after his mother and the ancestral property. The learned counsel argues that a property mafia named Santosh Kumar manipulated the elderly mother into executing a gift deed in his favour through illegal and forged procedures, which prompted the first petitioner to file Original Suit No. 1036 of 2023 for cancellation of the said gift deed. The learned counsel emphasizes that after the filing of the civil suit, the informant and Santosh Kumar lodged the present criminal case based on a fabricated story to harass the petitioners. The learned counsel highlights that both parties have subsequently resolved their dispute and executed a compromise deed dated 25.08.2024, which has been verified by the learned court vide order dated 06.11.2024. The learned counsel submits that the informant has even expressed her unwillingness to proceed with the criminal case to the investigating officer, but no heed has been paid to her request. The learned counsel argues that since the matter pertains to a civil property dispute that has been amicably settled, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law and would cause irreparable harm to the petitioners' reputation and liberty. 5. The relief prayed for by the petitioners has been opposed by the learned A.G.A., who submits that during the course of investigation, the complicity of one of the accused, namely Nitu, was not found, and accordingly, her name has been expunged from the array of accused. It is further submitted that the police, after due investigation, has submitted a charge-sheet before the competent court, and the concerned Magistrate has already taken cognizance of the same. 6. In response, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the subsequent developments, particularly the execution of a compromise deed dated 25.08.2024 between the parties, which has also been duly verified by the competent civil court vide order dated 06.11.2024, the petitioners do not wish to press the present writ petition. However, it is prayed that liberty may be granted to the petitioners to file an appropriate application before the trial court for consideration of the compromise in accordance with law. 7. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident that the origin of the dispute lies in a civil property matter, which has already been amicably resolved through a compromise between the parties. The informant herself is not inclined to pursue the criminal proceedings further, and her unwillingness has also been conveyed to the investigating officer. Moreover, the offences alleged in the FIR are either compoundable under law or arise out of personal enmity in the context of a civil dispute. In view of the compromise verified by the competent court and in the interest of securing justice and preventing misuse of criminal proceedings, it would not be appropriate to allow the criminal trial to continue, as it would serve no fruitful purpose and would result in abuse of the process of law. Therefore, while disposing of the petition as not pressed, we deem it appropriate to grant liberty to the petitioners to approach the trial court for seeking appropriate relief in light of the verified compromise. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 NLY (Anil Kumar-X,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad