Disposed

Lalit Kumar Sahu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 2 Others

Allahabad HC31 Oct 2023/8954/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court considered an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings based on a compromise. The court declined to verify the agreement itself and remanded the matter to the trial court to verify the compromise in presence of parties, staying coercive action for one month.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed with direction to trial court to verify compromise; no coercive action for one month.

Lalit Kumar Sahu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:71393

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8954 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Lalit Kumar Sahu And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet crime No.52 of 2005, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (x) SC/ST Act, Police Station Nagram, District- Lucknow as well as impugned summoning order dated 05.09.2005 by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in S.T. No.462 of 2014 (State Vs. Lalit Kumar Sahu and other) crime No.52 of 2005, under Sections 324, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (x) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Nagram, District- Lucknow and the entire proceeding of the aforesaid criminal case on the basis of compromise.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits 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.6 to the application.

¶9

Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the trial court concerned 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 trial 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.

¶11

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.

¶12

For a period of one month, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 31.10.2023 Ashutosh Pandey

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Lalit Kumar Sahu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Kumar Sahu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 2 Others

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

Virendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. of Home Deptt. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another

Kaleem Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Sri Krishna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Jitendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Lko

Arshad Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Mohd. Jaid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko