Dismissed

Sanjay Kumar and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Jun 2023A482/40872/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants challenged a summoning order and proceedings in a matrimonial dispute, claiming a compromise was reached. The Court granted an interim stay contingent on verifying the deed. Applicants failed to comply, and the lower court reported no compromise. The application was dismissed for failure to approach the court with clean hands.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing proceedings and interim stay was dismissed.

Sanjay Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:126784

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40872 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Dwivedi, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. S.B. Yadav, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Ashish Kumar Yadav, the learned counsel representing complainant-opposite party 2.

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the Summoning Order dated 06.04.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad in Complaint Case No. 23199 of 2021 (Smt. Pinky Vs. Rinkoo and Others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Pachokhara, District-Firozabad as well as the entire proceedings of aforementioned complaint case.

¶9

Present application came up for admission on 09.01.2023 and this Court passed the following order:-

¶10

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

This application has been moved with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding as well as cognizance order dated 06.04.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad in Complain Case No.23199 of 2021 (Smt. Pinky Vs. Rinkoo and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 DP Act, Police Station Pachokhara, District Firozabad.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicants states that matter has been compromised between the parties. He further states that the compromise dated 06.09.2022 (annexure-6) has been filed before the court below but same has not been verified as yet.

¶13

On these facts, as the matter is of matrimonial nature and the parties have arrived for some amicable settlement regarding which compromise duly

¶14

arrived at between the parties is pending verification before learned court below and, therefore, it would be in the interest of justice to protect the right of the applicant pending final disposal of the matter. Learned counsel also submits that as the parties have entered into amicable settlement, there is no likelihood of conviction in the matter.

¶15

As an interim measure, till the next date of listing, further proceedings of the aforesaid case shall be kept in abeyance.

¶16

However, learned counsel for the applicants, as prayed, is granted three weeks time to get the compromise deed (annexure-6) verified from the court below and file a certified copy thereof, on or before the next date of listing before this Court.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant is directed to file copy of this order before the court below within 10 days from today for compliance, failing which, interim protection given by this Court shall cease to operate and law will take its own course.

¶18

As prayed, put up as fresh on 16.02.2023."

¶19

Subsequent to the order dated 16.02.2023, the parties appeared before court below. Court below on the basis of material on record passed an order dated 14.03.2023 categorically stating therein that the complainant has duly filed an application that no comnpromise has been entered into by the parties.

¶20

In view of above, the interim order granted in favour of applicants was vacated by this Court vide order dated 16.02.2023, which reads as under:-

¶21

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶22

Saying that the parties would appear before the concerned court and would get the compromise deed verified, the stay order was obtained on behalf of the applicants on 09.01.2023 but the applicants did nothing and now they are not inclined to obey the aforesaid order. Hence, the interim order passed on 09.01.2023 stands vacated.

¶23

Issue notice to opposite party no.2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week.

¶24

Put up as fresh on 07.04.2023."

¶25

On the above premise, the learned counsel for complainantopposite party 2 submits that since applicants have not approached this Court with clean hands and have played a fraud with this Court, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court.

¶26

When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicants could not overcome the same.

¶27

As a result, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.

¶28

It is accordingly dismissed .

¶29

Order Date :- 15.6.2023 Vinay

¶30

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

Sanjay Kumar and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar and 4 Others 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

Sanjay Kumar Chaurasiya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gautam Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Janakraj Vs State of U.P.

Surya Prakash Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satya Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Pooja and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others