Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 72898 (ALL)

GAURAV PANDEY ALIAS GOLU AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

CRLP/14505/2025 · 2025-10-05

Garima Prashad, Vivek Varma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14505 of 2025 Court No. - 49 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. HON'BLE MRS. GARIMA PRASHAD, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Suchit Tandon, learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent nos. 1 and 2, and Sri Kumar Ashutosh Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 3 and 4. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to quash the impugned first information report dated 13.11.2024 registered as Case Crime No. 171 of 2024, under Sections 76, 115(2), 191(2), 191(3), 333, 351(3), 352 B.N.S., Police Station Daraganj, District Prayagraj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that:- (i) the dispute between the parties were purely civil and private in nature; (ii) the F.I.R. came to be lodged by the respondent no. 3 owing to misunderstandings and misgivings between the parties and not on account of any real occurrence, as alleged; (iii) there never was any criminal intent on part of the petitioners nor any criminal offence as alleged had ever occurred; (iv) at present, the parties to the dispute have resolved their Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : G.A., Nagendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : Kumar Ashutosh Srivastava, Nagendra Bahadur Singh Gaurav Pandey Alias Golu And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) differences and have made peace; (v) in view of the settlement reached between the parties, the parties pray another chance be given to them to develop and experience normal relationship; and, (vi) in such changed circumstances, the respondent no. 3 does not wish to press charges against the petitioners. 4. It is also stated that compromise deed has been filed by the parties. Further, pursuant to the order dated 25.08.2025, the compromise deed was sent for verification to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj and the parties too appeared before him. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj has verified the compromise on 10.09.2025. The copy of verification report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj dated 10.09.2025 has been placed on the record by the office. 5. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand, reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 and 4 does not dispute the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that the respondent nos. 3 and 4 have no objection if the first information report is quashed. 7. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made in the writ petition. 8. From a perusal of the record, it appears, the real dispute between the parties was civil and private in nature and criminal prosecution arose incidently and not as a natural consequence of the real occurrence. It is further apparent that the parties have entered into a compromise and they further appear to have settled their aforesaid real disputes amicably. CRLP No. 14505 of 2025 2 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise entered into between the parties and taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the compromise between parties be accepted and further taking into account the legal position as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra), Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (supra) the impugned first information report of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed. 10. The present writ petition thus stands allowed. October 6, 2025 SKT/- CRLP No. 14505 of 2025 3 (Mrs. Garima Prashad,J.) (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad