Abrar Ahmad And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ...
- Neutral2026:AHC-LKO:33057
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where parties to criminal proceedings under sections 323, 504, and 506 of the IPC file a compromise before the trial court, the trial court must issue notices requiring the personal presence of all signatories to the compromise and proceed to verify it in their presence before accepting it as valid. A trial court, upon verification of a compromise in criminal proceedings, shall prepare a report documenting the verification, make the compromise part of the record, and permit the parties to obtain certified copies of both the report and the compromise deed, which may thereafter be used as a basis for an application to quash the proceedings before the High Court. Where a compromise has been filed in criminal proceedings but its verification is pending, the trial court may be directed to stay the proceedings against the applicants for a specified period to allow the compromise to be verified and reported upon. The trial court must examine and report whether all parties against whom the chargesheet was filed are parties to any compromise subsequently filed, as part of the verification process.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Sri Ravi Kant, advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ravi Kant, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant application has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet, summoning order dated 17.03.2023 as well as further proceedings of case no. 26206 of 2023 arising out of case crime no. 0053 of 2020 under sections 323, 504, 506 of IPC Police Station Gomti Nagar Vistrar, district Lucknow.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that under some misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicants and thereafter, the parties have amicably settled their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 15.04.2026 which has been annexed as annexure no. 4 to the instant application. He next added that now there is no grievance in between the parties with each other and the criminal proceedings against the applicants are the futile exercise as there is no fate of trial and that is amount to harassment of the applicants and thus, the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that the parties have settled their dispute amicably through a compromise deed and there is no further grievance of the opposite parties against the present applicants and the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.
Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.
Now whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the trial court as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.
Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. 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.
The court 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.
For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of case no. 26206 of 2023 arising out of case crime no. 0053 of 2020 under sections 323, 504, 506 of IPC Police Station Gomti Nagar Vistrar, district Lucknow, shall remain stayed so far as applicants are concerned.
The trial Court is directed to examine the fact that whether all the parties against whom the chargesheet was filed, the party in the compromise and in this respect, it shall also sent a report along with the verification order.
Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicants, if any, after taking the photocopy of the same.
(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)
May 7, 2026
Mayank
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free