Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Allahabad High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. March

Vaibhav Mishra vs. State of U.p. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Decided on 29 March 2024• Citation: /2798/2024• Allahabad High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                             Court No. - 27                                       
                             Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2798 of 2024       
                             Applicant :- Vaibhav Mishra                          
                             Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
                             And 3 Others                                         
                             Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Ajai Pratap Singh       
                             Chauhan,Kunwar Samitinjay Singh                      
                             Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinay Pandey      
                             Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.                         
                             1. Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the opposite
                             party no.2 to 4 is taken on record.                  
                             2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A.
                             for the State and Sri Vinay Pandey, the learned counsel for the
                             opposite party nos. 2, 3 and 4.                      
                             2. The instant application has been filed under Section 482
                             Cr.P.C, seeking quashing of the impugned charge sheet no.
                             0123 of 2016 dated 18.08.2016 arising out of Case Crime No.
                             199/2016, under Sections 452, 323, 504 I.P.C, Police Station
                             Ataria, District Sitapur as well as the entire criminal
                             proceedings of Criminal Case (C.I.S.) No. 2208061 of 2016,
                             which is pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial
                             Magistrate-II, Sitapur.                              
                             3. The quashing of the proceedings has been sought on the
                             ground that the parties have entered into a compromise on
                             12.03.2024, original copy of the compromise has been annexed
                             with the affidavit.                                  
                             4. The F.I.R was lodged on 09.08.2016 stating that the accused
                             persons had assaulted two persons. Copies of the medico legal
                             examination report of two victims indicates that the injury
                             suffered by them were simple in nature. It has been stated in the
                             compromise that the dispute between the parties was personal
                             in nature and it did not affect public peace and tranquility.
                             5. The learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 has also
                             supported the factum of compromise and has given his consent
                             for proceedings being quashed on the basis of compromise.
                             6. Considering the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the
                             cases of B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and
                             another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I.
                             and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus  

                             State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus
                             Station of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh
                             and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6
                             SCC  466, it would  be appropriate in the facts and  
                             circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as
                             continuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise
                             in futility.                                         
                             7. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute
                             by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and the
                             law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the present
                             petition is allowed and the charge sheet no. 0123 of 2016 dated
                             18.08.2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 199/2016, under
                             Sections 452, 323, 504 I.P.C, Police Station Ataria, District
                             Sitapur as well as the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal
                             Case (C.I.S.) No. 2208061 of 2016, which is pending before the
                             court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Sitapur are
                             hereby quashed.                                      
                             Order Date :- 29.3.2024                              
                             Raj                                                  
    Digitally signed by :-                                                        
    RAJ NIGAM                                                                     
    High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,                                        
    Lucknow Bench