Disposed

Ashraf v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Mar 2023A482/2792/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking quashment of proceedings based on a compromise regarding an offense under Section 436 IPC, the Court directed the trial court to verify the compromise deed and record statements. The High Court refused to decide on quashment immediately and stayed coercive action until such verification is completed.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with directions to lower court for compromise verification; coercive action stayed until verification is complete.

Ashraf Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2792 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Ashraf Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Jeet Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Ojha

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Amar Jeet Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Sanjay Ojha, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 06.11.2020 and cognizance/summoning order dated 02.01.2021 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, IIIrd Meerut in Case No.492 of 2021 (State vs. Ashraf) arising out of Case Crime No.447 of 2020, under Section 436 IPC, Police Station-Sardhana, District-Meerut on the basis of compromise.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them. In this regard, an application alongwith compromise deed on behalf of both the parties has been filed before the court below stating therein that they have entered into compromise and they do not want to press the case, copy of said application has been annexed as Annexure no.3 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.

¶8

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.

¶9

In view of the above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with an application for verification of the compromise deed 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 the compromise and after ensuring the presence of parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the

¶10

same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from today. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statement of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not?

¶11

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.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 15.3.2023 Jitendra/-

¶15

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

Ashraf v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashraf 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajid Khan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Keshav Dev Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohd. Ahmad Khan Vs State of U.P. and another

Shyam Sundar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivam Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Khem Chand @ Khem Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another