3 min readLucknowUpdated: May 1, 2026 03:42 PM IST
The verdict, delivered by Special Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act Judge RP Mogera, brings partial closure to a case registered in July 1993 that involved a decades-long investigation and trial. Also, the court acquitted 17 others accused in the case.
(Photo generated using AI)
Stating that justice is not a “private enterprise”, the Allahabad High Court frowned upon a petition that sought to quash an FIR, that included serious charges such as attempt to murder, on the ground that both sides have arrived at a compromise.
Dismissing the petition, a division bench of Justices J J Munir and Tarun Saxena, in its April 29 order, observed, “The public justice system is designed to deliver justice to the public and the citizens must understand that justice is not a private enterprise.”
The writ petition sought to quash the FIR, lodged on December 18 last year against petitioner Manoj Kumar and others named in the case.
The FIR was registered at Meerut’s Kharkhauda police station under BNS sections 109 (attempt to murder), 131 (assault), 191(2) (rioting), 118(1) (injuring using weapons like stabbing, shooting), 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt), 351(2) (criminal intimidation), 351(3) (threatening to cause death causing grievous hurt) and 352 (intentional insult).
A clash had occurred between two groups and both sides had lodged cross FIRs. Pradeep Kumar, who is the complainant of the case, had sustained serious injuries.
The court, in its order, mentioned that on the petitioner’s side, serious injuries were sustained by three men. One of them was injured seriously to the extent that he was referred to the radiologist and orthopaedic surgeon.
The bench stated that the petitioners have now come up, saying they’ve compromised and filed a memorandum of compromise in court, dated April 22, which was attached to the writ petition.
Story continues below this ad
The court observed, “The question is, whether on the basis of a compromise of this kind, given the injuries sustained on both sides, where cross versions are disclosed, can the FIR be quashed?”
“We are aware of the principle that in certain cases under Section 307 IPC, which corresponds to Section 109 BNS, the Supreme Court has endorsed the course of quashing proceedings if parties compromise. But such compromises are not permissible in all kinds of cases, where the allegations are of attempted murder. It depends on the nature of the assault and the injuries sustained,” observed the court.
It added that here, the assault was from both sides and both sides sustained serious injuries. According to the cross FIR, the petitioners used sticks (lathi-danda) and iron-rods. Both sides had used deadly weapons and inflicted injuries, which in the ordinary course of nature, were sufficient to cause death prima facie, the bench said.
The court observed further, “In our opinion, if the compromises were licensed in such cases as a matter of course, the public justice system would collapse. The State is the forerunner of the prosecution and no one has the right to take the law into their own hands, commit heinous offences, and then deflect the course of justice by resorting to the device of a compromise, privately done.”
Story continues below this ad
“We do not find any good ground to quash the impugned FIR. We are informed that the police have put in a final report in the FIR lodged by the petitioners. It goes without saying that it will be open to the petitioner to protest the final report,” the court stated in its order.
Bhupendra Pandey is the Resident Editor of the Lucknow edition of The Indian Express. With decades of experience in the heart of Uttar Pradesh’s journalistic landscape, he oversees the bureau’s coverage of India’s most politically significant state. His expertise lies in navigating the complex intersections of state governance, legislative policy, and grassroots social movements. From tracking high-stakes assembly elections to analyzing administrative shifts in the Hindi heartland, Bhupendra’s reportage provides a definitive lens on the region's evolution.
Authoritativeness He leads a team of seasoned reporters and investigators, ensuring that The Indian Express’ signature "Journalism of Courage" is reflected in every regional story. His leadership is central to the Lucknow bureau’s reputation for breaking stories that hold the powerful to account, making him a trusted figure for policy analysts, political scholars, and the general public seeking to understand the nuances of UP’s complex landscape.
Trustworthiness & Accountability Under his stewardship, the Lucknow edition adheres to the strictest standards of factual verification and non-partisan reporting. He serves as a bridge between the local populace and the national discourse, ensuring that regional issues are elevated with accuracy and context. By prioritizing primary-source reporting and on-the-ground verification, he upholds the trust that readers have placed in the Express brand for nearly a century. ... Read More
