Disposed

Gopi Chand v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2023A482/2830/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought to quash a charge sheet and proceedings arising under the Electricity Act. The court, noting willingness to settle and reliance on Suresh Ganpati Halvankar, directed the applicant to approach the concerned authority for settlement and disposed of the petition without a specific order on the quashing prayer.

What did the court decide?

Directed the applicant to approach the concerned authority for settlement of grievance per Suresh Ganpati Halvankar.

Gopi Chand Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 69 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2830 of 2023 Applicant :- Gopi Chand Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Pratibha Vohra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pranjal Mehrotra

¶2

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶3

List revised.

¶4

Heard Ms. Pratibha Vohra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Chandra holding brief of Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the Electricity Department/Opposite Party No.2 and Sri S.B. Maurya, learned counsel for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶5

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicantGopi Chand with the prayer to allow this application quash the charge sheet dated 7.12.2019 including cognizance order dated 18.9.2020 as well as entire proceeding of S.S.T. No.314 of 2020 (State Vs. Gopi Chand) arising out of Case Crime No.379 of 2019, u/s 135 of Electricity Act, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal pending in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge, E.C. Act, Chandausi Sambhal at Chandausi and with a further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the said case.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant at the very outset states that since offences are compoundable he is ready to settle the matter with the opposite party no.2. He has placed reliance in the case of Suresh Ganpati Halvankar vs. The State of Maharashtra and others in Criminal Appeal No. 156 of 2018 decided on 22.01.2018 and appropriate directions be issued for getting the matter settled with the department.

¶7

Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 have no objection to the said proposition.

¶8

In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant which are not objected by learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 the applicant may approach the concerned authority for settlement of his grievance in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Suresh Ganpati Halvankar (supra).

¶9

The petition is accordingly disposed of .

¶10

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶11

Order Date :- 6.2.2023 Gaurav

¶12

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gopi Chand v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopi Chand v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhishek Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aleem Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nitin Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Prince Katiyar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Moti Lal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another