Allahabad High Court
DHARMENDRA NISHAD AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed off/Decided on merits
Holding
The court granted the application, quashing the charge sheet and staying further proceedings, and ordered a 30‑day prohibition on coercive police action.
Summary
The applicants, Dharmendra Nishad and two others, filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the criminal proceedings in POCSO Case No. 11/2018 and to stay any further proceedings, relying on a joint compromise dated 20‑08‑2025. They also invoked the Supreme Court judgments in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) and Musheer Alam v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025) to support their prayer. The State opposed no objection to the relief sought. The High Court examined the applicability of Section 482 CrPC, the relevant provisions of the IPC and the POCSO Act, and the precedents cited. It disposed of the application by granting the relief, quashing the charge sheet and staying further proceedings, and directed that the police not take any coercive action against the applicants for a period of 30 days.
Issues considered
- Whether the criminal proceedings in the POCSO case can be quashed and stayed under Section 482 CrPC on the basis of a joint compromise.
- Whether the Supreme Court precedents in Satender Kumar Antil and Musheer Alam are applicable to justify the quash of the proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 354
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 7, 8
Subjects
- quash of criminal proceedings
- Section 482 CrPC
- POCSO Act
- joint compromise
- Supreme Court precedent
- stay of proceedings
- police coercive action
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7810 of 2025
Dharmendra Nishad And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 5
Others .....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pradeep Kumar Shukla, Manoj Kumar
Nishad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 11
HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.
2. The present application has been filed by the applicants for the following main
reliefs:-
"(i) quash the entire criminal proceedings pending before the Court of
Special Judge POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar in POCSO Case No.
11/2018, State Versus Dharmendra Nishad & others, including impugned
Charge Sheet No. 01/2017 dated 2.01.2018 arises out of Case Crime No.
185/2017, U/s- 354,323,IPC, & 7/8 POCSO Act Police Station-Bhiti,
District-Ambedkar Nagar, on the basis of joint compromise dated
20.08.2025 drawn/executed between the petitioners and opposite party
no. 2 to 4, contained as Annexure No. 1, to this application.,
(ii) stay the further criminal proceedings pending before the Court of
Special Judge POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar in POCSO Case No.
11/2018, State Versus Dharmendra Nishad & others, including impugned
Charge Sheet No. 01/2017 dated 2.01.2018 arises out of Case Crime No.
185/2017, U/s- 354,323, IPC, & 7/8 POCSO Act Police Station-Bhiti,
District-Ambedkar Nagar, criminal proceedings pending before the Court
of Special Judge POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar during pendency of
present application."
A482 No. 7810 of 2025
2
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that at this stage, he
is confining his prayer to seek the benefit of the judgment(s) passed by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation and another, (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351 : (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Musheer
Alam vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116 for
which liberty may be given to the applicants and liberty may also be given to the
applicants to approach this Court again at appropriate stage for seeking appropriate
relief.
4. Learned AGA for the State has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel
for the applicants.
5. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with liberty as
prayed for.
6. Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observations made by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra) and Musheer Alam
(Supra), this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to observe that it is
expected from the Police Officer concerned that for a period of 30 days from today,
they would not take any coercive action against the applicants in the aforesaid case. It
is made clear that in this regard, no application shall be entertained.
(Saurabh Lavania,J.)
September 19, 2025
KR
Digitally signed by :-
RABINDRA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,
Lucknow Bench
Checking your session…