Allowed

Julfikar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC21 Oct 2022A482/29339/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings involving Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 323 IPC. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court quashed the case after the lower court verified a compromise entered by the parties.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of Case No. 10851 of 2016 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 323 IPC are quashed.

Julfikar and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29339 of 2022 Applicant :- Julfikar And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Subhash Chandra Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rakesh Kumar Mishra

¶2

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Rahul Kumar Pandey, holding brief of Shri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel respondent no. 2 to 5.

¶4

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners as well as respondent no. 2 has resolved their dispute by entering into a compromise.

¶5

This Court vide order dated 21.02.2019 directed the learned court below to verify the compromise entered between the parties. The order dated 21.02.2019 is extracted below:-

¶6

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 10851 of 2016, under sections 147,148,149,324,323 I.P.C., Police Station-Tanda, District-Rampur, arising out of case crime no. 691 of 2015, in respect of the chargesheet no. 40 of 2016, dated 29-01-2016, pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,Rampur and cognizance order dated 06-12-2016 endorsed upon the chargesheet.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submit that both the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise which has taken place between the parties is also filed before this Court as Annexure No. 4 to the application.

¶9

Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the Court below as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.

¶10

Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record. The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶11

For a period of one month, no coercive action shall be taken against the

¶12

applicants in the aforesaid case."

¶13

In compliance of the said order, the compromise entered between the parties which is on record has been duly verified by the learned court below. The verification report dated 14.10.2021 has also been filed along with the petition and hence, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that since the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court by entering into compromise and the said compromise has been verified under the order of the Court, hence, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab" reported in "(2012) 10 SCC 303" , the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed.

¶14

Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 to 5 concedes the argument of learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has no objection to this innocuous prayer.

¶16

In view of the above and considering the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab" reported in "(2012) 10 SCC 303" , as well as the fact that the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below vide its report dated 14.10.2021 the proceedings proceedings of Case No. 10851 of 2016, under sections 147,148,149,324,323 I.P.C., Police Station-Tanda, District-Rampur, arising out of case crime no. 691 of 2015 are hereby quashed.

¶17

The petition is allowed.

¶18

Order Date :- 21.10.2022 RC

¶19

Digitally signed by RAM CHANDER YADAV Date: 2022.10.21 14:20:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Julfikar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Julfikar and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

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

Vikash Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gajendra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mangal Kushwaha Alias Mangal Singh Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhishek and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sarvjeet Singh Alias Shabba Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishal Chaturvedi Alias Chotu Vs State of U.P.and Another