Disposed

Himmu Patel @ Har Prasad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Apr 2023A482/2709/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad HC disposed of an application to quash criminal proceedings under CrPC s. 482. While noting a compromise, the Court directed the applicant to verify the settlement and fulfillment of terms before approaching the High Court again for quashing.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed; parties directed to verify compromise with trial court; no coercive action pending verification.

Himmu Patel @ Har Prasad Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2709 of 2023 Applicant :- Himmu Patel @ Har Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Triloki Nath,Shravan Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akhand Pratap

¶2

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶3

A short counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 today in the Court, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

¶4

Heard Mr. Triloki Nath Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA for the State.

¶5

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 27.04.2015 and cognizance order dated 02.04.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of Special Trial No.264 of 2016 (State vs. Himmu Patel) arising out of Case Crime No.0043 of 2015, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3(1)(10) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Tahrauli, District-Jhansi, on the basis of compromise.

¶6

On 03.04.2023, the following order was passed:-

¶7

"Sri Akhand Pratap, learned Advocate, who has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no. 2, states that the parties have amicably settled the dispute and have entered into compromise. He further submits that the compensation amount as received by the second opposite party, shall be returned and an affidavit in this regard shall be filed positively by the next date.

¶8

Put up this case on 18th April, 2023, as fresh. Till then proceedings of Special Trial No. 264 of 2016, 'State v. Himmu Patel', arising out of Case Crime No. 43 of 2015, under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC read with Section 3(1)10 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Tahrauli, District Jhansi, shall remain stayed."

¶9

In compliance of the aforesaid order, a short counter affidavit has been filed by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, wherein it has been stated that the compensation amount as received by the opposite party no.2 for the offence under S.C./S.T. Act has been returned back as has been stated in para 8 of the short counter affidavit and the Treasury Challan proving the aforesaid has been annexed at page 9 of the short counter affidavit.

¶10

Learned counsel for the parties submits that the parties have

¶11

amicably settled the dispute and have entered into compromise. In this regard, an application alongwith affidavit on behalf of both the parties has been filed before the concerned court stating therein that they have entered into compromise and they do not want to press the case, copy of said compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure no.4 to this application. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the court below and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of the process of law.

¶12

Learned AGA, however, submits that it is the concerned court below, which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicants may approach the concerned court below and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law.

¶13

In view of the above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with an application for verification of compromise deed, so filed, as well as a certified copy of this order within two weeks from today. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of such compromise and after ensuring the presence of parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statements of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not? The aforesaid facts regarding the amount towards compensation as received and stated to be returned, shall also be verified.

¶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

Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶16

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.

¶17

Order Date :- 18.4.2023/Jitendra/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Himmu Patel @ Har Prasad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Himmu Patel @ Har Prasad 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

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

Deepam Gupta and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Bansal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Qamar Ahmad @ Guddan and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Om Prakhash Vs State of U.P. and Another