Disposed

Virendra Kumar Kanaujia @ Virendra Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2023/3923/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court bench directed lower court to verify compromise reached between applicant and complainant before quashing proceedings under Sections 498A IPC and Domestic Violence Act. Decision to quash sub ject to verification report.

What did the court decide?

Direction to lower court to verify compromise and report before allowing quashing. Summoning order stayed pending verification.

Virendra Kumar Kanaujia @ Virendra Kumar and 2 Others Vs… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3923 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Kanaujia @ Virendra Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Singh Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶6

1. Vakalatnama filed by, Sri Jagjeet Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

¶7

2. Heard Sri Chandra Shekhar Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Jagjeet Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and Sri Anurag Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

3. The instant application has been filed by the applicants for quashing the charge sheet dated 15.11.2018 bearing charge sheet no.01/2018, arising out of Case Crime No.0192/2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Krishna Nagar, District Lucknow as well as summoning order dated 25.02.2019.

¶9

4. Learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 jointly submit that nothing as alleged has been committed by the applicants, however, the applicant and the complainant have entered into a compromise on 25.08.2022. They have settled their dispute amicably out of the Court and have decided not to contest the case against each other. Copy of the compromise dated 25.08.2022 is on record as Annexure No.5 to the instant application. The co-accused, Ram Karan, who is father-in-law of opposite party no.2/complainant has died on 16.11.2022. A copy of death certificate of Ram Karan is annexed as Annexure No.4 to the instant application.

¶10

5. Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised

¶11

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

¶12

6. Accordingly, this application is finally disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, notices be issued to all surviving accused persons and opposite party no.2/complainant 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 concerned and the compromise will be made part of the record.

¶13

7. The court concerned 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.

¶14

8. The Registry of the Court is directed to return the original compromise deed annexed with the instant application to the learned counsel for the applicants after retaining a photocopy of the same on record.

¶15

9. During the process of verification of the aforesaid compromise, impugned summoning order dated 25.02.2019 and any process issued, pursuant thereto, shall not be given effect to qua the present applicants.

¶16

Order Date :- 26.4.2023 A.Dewal

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Virendra Kumar Kanaujia @ Virendra Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Kumar Kanaujia @ Virendra Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

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

Manish Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivam @ Shivam Sahu ( @ Vishnu) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Naushad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Ketan Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and 2 Others

Ramu @ Rajesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Pankaj Kuamar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another