Disposed

Janki Prasad Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and another

Allahabad HC6 Mar 2018A482/6692/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Bench held that in a private dispute, it is fit to direct the lower court to verify a filed compromise affidavit after hearing both sides. Upon verification, the court should be at liberty to quash proceedings as per the law laid in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of; directed lower court to verify compromise after hearing; granted two-month moratorium on coercive steps.

Janki Prasad Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. and another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6692 of 2018 Applicant :- Janki Prasad Dwivedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pt. S.P. Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶3

On the oral request of counsel for the applicant, he is permitted to make necessary correction in the prayer during the course of the day.

¶4

Heard Sri Pt. S.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Pandey holding brief of Sri S.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.

¶5

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 4.10.2016 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Garautha, District Jhansi in Criminal Case no. 496/1988 (State vs. Ashok and others) u/s 147, 148, 323, 336, 427 IPC, P.S. Tahrauli, District Jhansi as well as order dated 21.11.2017 passed by Addl. Session Judge, Court no. 3, Jhansi in Criminal Revision no. 197/2016 (Janki Prasad Dwivedi vs. State).

¶6

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the alleged incident is said to have taken place in the year 1982 and the F.I.R. was lodged against 37 persons, out of which till date 16 persons expired and some of them are missing and are not appearing before the court and the proceedings are pending for the last several years. He further submitted that the proceeding of the present case was stayed by the Court and thereafter stay was vacated. It is now submitted that a joint compromise affidavit by opposite party no. 2 and the applicant is filed which has been annexed. It is submitted that as the matter is very old and both the parties belongs to same village and infact they have settled all their differences and dispute and have now compromised the matter, thus, the proceeding of the present case be quashed.

¶7

However, in my opinion since the matter pertains to private dispute, I deem it fit to direct the concerned court to verify the compromise if filed by the applicants and accused in the case after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the both sides and after due verification in case the parties have compromised the matter then the court will be at liberty to quash the proceedings in view of law laid by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab and another in Special Leave Petition (Crl) No.8989 of 2010 decided on 24 September, 2012 .

¶8

A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.

¶9

For a period of two months no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants.

¶10

In view of above, the application stands disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 6.3.2018 Dhirendra/

Janki Prasad Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janki Prasad Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Chand and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

joni and 2 others Vs state of up and another

Vikash and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ramhari Vs State of U.P. and another

Phirasat @ Kaluwa Vs State of U.P. and another

Murshad Vs State of U.P. and another