Allahabad High Court
/5558/2019 of MOHD. TAAHIR and OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. and ANOTHER on 4 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5558 of 2019 Court No. - 23 HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. 1. Case called out. 2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is of the year 2019. 3. When the matter was called out, none appeared on behalf of the applicants to press this application.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5558 of 2019
Court No. - 23
HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Case called out.
2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is of the year 2019.
3. When the matter was called out, none appeared on behalf of the applicants to press this application. Neither any adjournment slip nor any request on behalf of the applicants has been made to adjourn the case. None appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2.
4. Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State is present.
5. From a perusal of order sheet, it transpires that vide order dated 02.08.2019 parties were directed to appear before the Senior Registrar along with the original documents for verification of the factum of the compromise deed. The Senior Registrar vide report dated 13.08.2019 submits that neither parties nor their counsels were present for verification. Again vide order dated 10.03.2021 the parties were directed to appear before the Senior Registrar. According to report of learned Senior Registrar dated 18.03.2021, neither the parties nor their counsel were present for verification.
6. It transpires from the record that the parties are not willing to pursue the matter or to do compromise and the application appears to have lost its efficacy due to efflux of time, hence the application is dismissed.
7. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. December 4, 2025 Anand/- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Nafees, Gyan Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Govt. Advocate, Pawan Kumar Misra (Rajeev Bharti,J.) Mohd. Taahir And Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench