Allahabad High Court
PRATEEK JAIN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The FIR dated 11‑01‑2025 and all related proceedings are quashed as the parties have settled the dispute through a verified compromise deed.
Summary
Petitioners Prateek Jain and another filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking quash of an FIR dated 11‑01‑2025 under Sections 103 and 104 of the Trade Mark Act, 1999 and Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023, and also a mandamus directing the release of seized goods. The parties later entered into a compromise deed, which was verified by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad, confirming that the dispute had been settled amicably. The State did not contest the existence or effect of the compromise. Relying on the verification report and the Supreme Court’s decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court held that there was no justification for proceeding with the criminal case. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings, and ordered the release of the goods.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR and the ensuing criminal proceedings can be quashed on the ground of a settlement and a court‑verified compromise deed.
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ of certiorari and mandamus in the circumstances.
- Whether the provisions of the Trade Mark Act, 1999 and the B.N.S., 2023 are applicable after the parties have settled the dispute.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 318(4), 3(5)
- Trade Mark Act, 1999 — s. 103, 104
Subjects
- quash FIR
- compromise deed
- certiorari
- mandamus
- Trade Mark Act
- B.N.S.
- settlement
- High Court writ petition
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4062 of 2025
Prateek Jain And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arvind Srivastava Iii, Pratik Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Ramji Singh Patel
Court No. - 48
HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.
1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the
following main prayers :-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari calling for the
records and quashing the impugned First Information Report dated
11.01.2025 (Annexure No. 1) in Case Crime No. 0018 of 2025 Under Section
103, 104, of Trade Mark Act, 1999 and Sections 318(4), 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023
Police Station Sahibabad, District Trans Hindon (Commissionerate
Ghaziabad).
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus to the
Respondent No. 2 & 3 to release the goods of the petitioners with immediate
effect and open the seal of the warehouse of the petitioners in which the
seized goods are existing."
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties have jointly
submitted that the parties concerned have settled their disputes
amicably and in compliance of the order dated 11.08.2026, the
said compromise deed has been produced before the Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad and the same has also been
verified in presence of the parties. It is further submitted that the
parties concerned shall abide by all the terms and conditions
CRLP No. 4062 of 2025
2
mentioned in the said compromise deed. Learned counsel for the
parties further submits that since all the disputes between the
parties concerned have already been settled and the compromise
deed has also been verified by the concerned Magistrate, the
impugned First Information Report dated 11.01.2025 against the
petitioners deserves to be quashed.
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf
of the State-respondents has not disputed the facts of compromise
as stated by learned counsel for the parties.
4. Heard Mr. Pratik Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioners, Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned Advocate holding brief
of Mr. Ramji Singh Patel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent no. 4 and Mr. S.N. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. appearing on
behalf of the State-respondents.
5. We have perused the verification report dated 27.08.2026 sent
by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.
6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned A.G.A.
appearing on behalf of the State-respondents, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of respondent no. 4, the verification report
dated 27.08.2026 sent by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad
and the statement made by the parties concerned that they shall
abide by all the terms and conditions of the said compromise deed,
we have satisfied that no purpose would be served to put the
petitioners on trial.
7. In view of the above-said facts as well as law laid down by the
Apex Court in the judgment of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab &
Another (2012) 10 SCC 303, we are inclined to allow this writ
CRLP No. 4062 of 2025
3
petition.
8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed.
9. The impugned F.I.R. dated 11.01.2025 in connection with Case
Crime No. 0018 of 2025, under Sections 103, 104, of Trade Mark
Act, 1999 and Sections 318(4), 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 Police Station
Sahibabad, District Trans Hindon (Commissionerate Ghaziabad)
along with all consequential proceedings, are hereby quashed.
September 29, 2026
Saurabh
(Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SAURABH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…