Allowed

Mayank Srivastava v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2023A482/42375/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash an order. The matter was referred to mediation, resulting in a settlement where the applicant paid a sum to the aggrieved party and agreed to withdraw pending cases. Consequently, the court quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was allowed and the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 508 of 2016 were quashed.

Mayank Srivastava Vs State of Up and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42375 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Mayank Srivastava Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ramendra Giri,Vivek Giri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Uday Bhan Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the order dated 15.9.2018 in Criminal Case No. 508 2016, State vs. Mayank Srivastava, arising out of Case Crime No.357/2015, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506, I.P.C., Police Station Kayamganj, District Farrukhabad, pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Kayamganj, Farrukhabad.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that this court vide order dated 28.11.2018 had referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. A settlement/agreement had been arrived at on 22.4.2022 between the parties. A copy of the same is on record. Perusal of the settlement/agreement thus reached reveals that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases between them. The said fact has been mentioned in para 6 and 7 of the settlement/agreement dated 22.4.2022. Paragraph 6 and 7 of the said report reads as under:

¶8

"6) The following settlement has been at between the Parties hereto;

¶9

a) That it was stated by the applicant that he has moved correction application in Application U/S 482 No. 42375 of 2018, praying therein to correct the name of the 0.P No. 2 i.e. Nitesh Gangwar in place of Susheel Kumar, The aforesaid correction application is pending before the Hon'ble Court.

¶10

b) That the parties have settled their dispute on the condition that the applicant-Mayank Srivastava shall pay an amount of Rs. 1,30,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Thirty Thousand Only) to Susheel Kumar (O.P No. 2) ( correct name in opposite party is Nitesh Gangwar).

¶11

c) That it is relevant to mention here that a demand draft bearing no. 508778 dated 27.05.2019 for Rs. 30,000/- (Rs. Thirty thousand only) drawn on ICICI Bank in the name of Sushil Kumar produced by the Mayank Srivastava (Applicant) on 27.05.2019, is being returned to the Mayank Srivastava (Applicant) as the same has been expired.

¶12

d) That the applicant-Mr. Mayank Srivastava is agreed that the demand

¶13

draft of Rs.1,30,000/- may be paid to Shri Nitesh Gangwar today i.e. 22.04.2022 which is an earlier period from the date when the name of Nitesh Gangwar shall be entered into the array of parties by order of the Hon'ble Court in place of Susheel Kumar.

¶14

e) That in case due to any technical or legal reasons the Hon'ble Court pleases to direct the refund of amount of Rs. 1,30,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Thirty Thousand Only) to the applicant, Shri Nitesh Gangwar shall have no objection and return the same to the applicant. Hence, today i.e. 22.04.2022, Mayank Srivastava (Applicant) has handed over a demand draft bearing no. 512206 dated 22.04.2022 drawn on ICICI Bank in name of Nitesh Gangwar for Rs. 1,30,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Thirty thousand only) and Nitesh Gangwar has acknowledged the receipt of the same.

¶15

f) That it has also been agreed between the parties that all the cases filed by them against each other regarding present dispute shall be withdrawn by the parties concerned by taking appropriate steps before the Court/authority concerned

¶16

g) That it has also been agreed between the parties that they shall not violate the terms and conditions of this settlement, otherwise the aggrieved party will be free to take legal recourse.

¶17

7.-By signing this Agreement the Parties hereto state that the APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 42375 of 2018 and all disputes and differences in this regard have been amicably settled by the Parties hereto through the process of Conciliation/Mediation."

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the settlement/agreement arrived at between the parties on 22.4.2022 before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, the proceedings in the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

¶19

In view of the above, the present application is allowed .

¶20

Order Date :- 2.2.2023 Faraz

¶21

Digitally signed by :- FARAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mayank Srivastava v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayank Srivastava v. State of Up 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

Amit Kumar Vs State of U.P and Another

Sudhir Kumar Seth Bagga Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kaleem @ Kaleem Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Mayank Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Nath Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others