Disposed

Karnail Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 May 2023/1296/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order on Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking quashing of FIR and stay of proceedings due to alleged settlement. Court directed lower court to verify compromise with parties present before allowing quashing and stayed proceedings for one month.

What did the court decide?

Stay of proceedings in Case Crime No.0596 of 2018 regarding applicants for one month; direction to lower court to verify compromise deed.

Karnail Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:37494

¶2

Court No. - 28

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1296 of 2021

¶4

Applicant :- Karnail Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Girish Kumar Pande,Prashant Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kunwar Sushant Prakash

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Kunwar Sushant Prakash learned counsel for opposite party no.2 , Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to summon the lower court record of Case Crime No.0596 of 2018 under Sections 294, 419, 420, 384, 506, 468, 471, 388 I.P.C., P.S. Mohammadi, District Kheri, State Vs. Saravajeet Singh and others pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mohammadi, Kheri and to quash the impugned charge sheet and summoning order against the applicants. Further prayer is to stay the entire proceeding of aforementioned case crime number during the pendency of the instant application.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that under some misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicants and thereafter, the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 2.11.2018, which has been annexed as annexure no.6 to the instant application. He next added that now there is no grievance in between the parties with each other and the criminal proceedings against the applicants are the futile exercise as there is no fate of trial and that is amount to harassment of the applicants and thus, the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶9

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that the parties have settled their dispute amicably through a compromise deed and there is no further grievance of the opposite parties against the present applicants and the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be

¶10

dropped.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.

¶12

Now 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.

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

For a period of one month, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of the Case Crime No.0596 of 2018, shall remain stayed so far as applicants are concerned.

¶16

Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicants, if any, after taking the photocopy of the same.

¶17

Order Date :- 24.5.2023 Ram Murti

¶18

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Karnail Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnail Singh and Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saleem and Anr. Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow and Anr.

Sushil Dixit @ Santosh Kumar Dixit and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko. and Another

Vipin Singh @ Bipin Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P Thru. the Prin. Secty Home Civil Sectt U.P Gov. Lko and Another

Rajat Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Akash Kumar @ Aashu Shukla and 5 Others Vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 4 Others

Sarvjeet Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko. and Another