Ankur Sinha vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ...

Mr. Mohan Lal,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 applicant, Mr. Mohan Lal, 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 entire proceeding of Case no. 46272 of 2018 (State Vs. Ankur Sinha), under sections 498-A,323, 504, 406 of I.P.C. and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), F.T.C., Court No. 50, Lucknow arising out of F.I.R. no. 0049 of 2016, at Police Station Mahila Thana, District-Lucknow.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that due to some misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicants and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 03-04-2026, 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 applicant and thus, the criminal proceedings against the applicant may be quashed.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Case no. 46272 of 2018 (State Vs. Ankur Sinha), under sections 498-A,323, 504, 406 of I.P.C. and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), F.T.C., Court No. 50, Lucknow arising out of F.I.R. no. 0049 of 2016, at Police Station Mahila Thana, District-Lucknow,shall remain stayed so far as present applicant is concerned.

The trial court is further directed for ensuring the fact that all the parties against whom the chargesheet was filed are present before the trial court and a report with respect to this effect shall also be sent alongwith verification order.

Office is directed to return the copy of original compromise deed to learned counsel for the applicant within a week.

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

May 7, 2026

AKS