SAURABH @ SAURABH KUMAR CHAUHAN vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER Advocate - G.A., ,SURESH KUMAR MAURYA — NA528/6980/2026

Case under Andhra State Act Section 323,43-323. Disposed: -- on 06th April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 18-Feb-2026

CNR: UPHC010969492026

Filing Number

NA528/

Filing Date

12-Feb-2026

Registration No

NA528/6980/2026

Registration Date

13-Feb-2026

Judge

Saurabh Srivastava

Coram

Saurabh Srivastava

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

APPLICATION ( 401500 )

Sub-Category

U/s 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of criminal Proceedings in State case ( 36 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Misc.

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--

Last updated 23-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Andhra State Act Section 323,43-323

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAURABH @ SAURABH KUMAR CHAUHAN

    Adv. ABHISHEK GUPTA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER Advocate - G.A., ,SURESH KUMAR MAURYA

  2. 2.SACHIN KUMAR

    Adv. SURESH KUMAR MAURYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Apr-2026

    —

    Saurabh Srivastava

  3. 06-Apr-2026

    Saurabh SrivastavaView PDF

    The Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings (Case No. 5167 of 2025) against applicant Saurabh Kumar Chauhan under IPC sections 323, 504, 506, and 307 based on a verified compromise between the parties. The court held that continuation of proceedings would be futile and contrary to justice interests, relying on Supreme Court precedent that permits quashing non-compoundable offences when disputes are genuinely settled to secure peace and justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 18-Feb-2026

    Padam Narain MishraView PDF

  6. 12-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. NA528/6980/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings (Case No. 5167 of 2025) against applicant Saurabh Kumar Chauhan under IPC sections 323, 504, 506, and 307 based on a verified compromise between the parties. The court held that continuation of proceedings would be futile and contrary to justice interests, relying on Supreme Court precedent that permits quashing non-compoundable offences when disputes are genuinely settled to secure peace and justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case