Inderjeet Singh Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 756 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Inderjeet Singh Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 3 April, 2026

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:23499
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
LUCKNOW 
 
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2542 of 2026   
 
   Inderjeet Singh Yadav    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Sajeet Singh   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A., Saurabh Singh   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 16
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.     

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

Present application has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet bearing charge-sheet No. 01/2021 dated 25.09.2021, arising from FIR No./Case Crime No. 792/2020, under Section 420, 406, 504 and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki, along with all consequential orders, and the entire criminal proceedings arising therefrom, pending before the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 18, Barabanki, in Case No. in Case No. 4122 of 2025 (State Vs. Inderjeet Singh Yadav).

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that a complaint was instituted under Section 138 and NI Act, as well as an FIR bearing no.792 of 2020 was also registered under Sections 420, 406, 504, and 506 IPC for the same set of allegations. He submitted that the parties have amicably settled their dispute, vide the settlement-agreement dated 22.12.2021, and thereafter the proceeding of the complaint under the 138 NI Act has been withdrawn. He next added that in paragraph 2 of the settlement-agreement, it has been agreed upon that both parties will withdraw the criminal cases registered against each other. He argued that there is no dispute between the parties and as per the settlement-agreement, the proceedings instituted against the applicant by lodging FIR No.792 of 2022, may be quashed.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that there is no further dispute between the parties, and he has no objection if the proceedings arising out of FIR bearing no.792 of 2020 is quashed.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the contention aforesaid, but he has also no objection if the proceedings are quashed, as the parties have amicably settled their disputes.

Considering submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that the parties have settled their disputes, and the proceedings under Section 138 NI Act, read with Section 142, have been withdrawn. This Court finds that in paragraph 2 of the settlement-agreement, appended along with the paper book, it has been stated on affidavit that both the parties have resolved their dispute, and there is no dispute between the parties and they have agreed that both the parties shall withdraw their respective FIRs from the competent court.

This Court has also noticed that the alleged accused is residing abroad, and he has sent his vakalatnama, including an authorization letter, by which the brother has been authorized to proceed on his behest, as per the settlement-agreement.

In view of the above, the criminal proceedings of Case No. 4122 of 2025 (State Vs. Inderjeet Singh Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 792/2020, under Section 420, 406, 504 and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki, are hereby quashed.

Consigned to the records.

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

April 3, 2026

Ram Murti