Disposed

Nar Singh Gupta @ Nar Singh Prasad and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC14 Mar 2018A482/7950/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of an application under s. 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings based on a compromise. Instead of granting an immediate order, the Court directed the applicants to file a separate application for verifying the compromise with the concerned Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Applicants directed to file an application within two weeks for the Magistrate to verify the compromise with Opposite Party no. 2.

Nar Singh Gupta @ Nar Singh Prasad and Anr. Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7950 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Nar Singh Gupta @ Nar Singh Prasad And Anr Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Sheetala Prasad Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Short counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri S.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Akhilesh Mishra, counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 26.06.2007 and cognizance dated 01.10.2007 as sell as entire criminal proceeding (in terms of compromise) of Case No. 2223 of 2008 (State vs. Nar Singh and another) arising out of case crime no. 887 of 2006, u/s 323, 504, 506 IPC and u/s 3(1)10 SC/ST Act, P.S. Mahuli, District Sant kabir Nagar.

¶8

It is submitted that the case is pending since 2008. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the compromise has been taken place between the parties therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶9

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has not disputed the facts as stated by the learned counsel for the applicant. He further contended that opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed with the present case against the applicant and the same may be allowed.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has not filed any documents to demonstrate the stage of trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for respondent no.2 as well as learned AGA submits that the applicants be permitted to appear before the Magistrate who may verify the said compromise from opposite party no.2.

¶12

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the applicants are directed to file an application within two weeks from today before the court concerned for deciding the compromise between the parties. Learned Magistrate after verifying the compromise from opposite party no.2, shall pass suitable orders within eight weeks thereafter in accordance with the provisions of law.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the application stands disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 14.3.2018 Dhirendra/

Nar Singh Gupta @ Nar Singh Prasad and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nar Singh Gupta @ Nar Singh Prasad and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shahid Ali @ Shola Jaunpuri Vs State of U.P.

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

Saddiq Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapil and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Soni Mishra @ Sunil Mishra and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.