Disposed

Sanjeev and 11 Others v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC3 May 2023A482/3814/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings on the basis of a compromise. The court directed the parties to verify the compromise, including fulfillment of terms and compensation, before the court below and restrained coercive action for two months.

What did the court decide?

Time granted to verify compromise before the court below; no coercive action for two months.

Sanjeev and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3814 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjeev And 11 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shravana Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Zaid Arshad,A/Z0009

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party nos.2 to 8 in Court today, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

¶6

Heard Mr. Shravana Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Zaid Arshad, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 8 and Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the charge sheet dated 08.06.2010 as well as cognizance order dated 17.07.2010 passed by A.C.J.M., Saharanpur and the entire proceedings of Special Case No.615 of 2012 (State Vs. Sanjeev and others), in Case Crime No.341 of 2010, under Sections 324, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)(10) SC/ST Act, Police Station-Deoband, District-Saharanpur, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Saharanpur, on the basis of compromise.

¶8

In paragraph no.2 of the aforesaid affidavit, it has been stated that the respondents have not received any financial support/compensation as required for the offence under SC/ST Act.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure 6 to the application wherein it has been mentioned that opposite parties do not want to press the case. 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 process of law.

¶10

Learned A.G.A., 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

¶11

decided in accordance with law.

¶12

In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the parties are directed to appear before the Court below along with compromise deed as well certified copy of this order within two weeks from today. It is expected that Court below may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of the parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, after recording the statements of the parties and also on the issue as to whether any compensation has been taken or not, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the Court concerned shall 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?

¶13

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.

¶14

For the period of two months or till the verification of compromise between the parties by the Court concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 3.5.2023 Rahul.

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjeev and 11 Others v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev and 11 Others v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

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

Irfan Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anand Prakash Gautam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manju Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gaurav Kumar Rajput and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandrabali Saroj and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Swayam Prakash Agnihotri Vs State of U.P. and Another