Disposed

Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2023A482/6323/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings based on a compromise, the High Court directed parties to appear before the Court below with the compromise deed for verification. No coercive action was applied against the applicant pending such verification.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action against the applicant pending verification of the compromise by the Court below within two months.

Harish Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6323 of 2023 Applicant :- Harish Chandra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Singh Sengar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶2

Compromise affidavit filed by Mr. Lakshman Singh, learned counsel on behalf of opposite party, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

¶3

Heard Mr. Vijay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Lakshman Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party and Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶4

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the charge sheet No. 01 of 2020 dated 02.07.2020 and cognizance order dated 28.09.2020 as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 798 of 2020 (State Vs. Harish Chandra) arising out of Case Crime No. 259 of 2020, under section 379 IPC, Police Station Jalaun, District Jalaun on the basis of compromise.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them. He further submits that parties also 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.

¶6

Learned counsel for opposite party as well as 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 applicant 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.

¶7

In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, both 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

¶8

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, 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 also 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?

¶9

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 applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶10

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 applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶11

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

¶12

Order Date :- 7.4.2023/Arti

¶13

Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Harish Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Chandra 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

Jaheer and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Shiv Gopal Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vineet Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ranjana Singh Vs State of U.P. 4 Others

Puttan Vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another