Disposed

Abhishek Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 May 2023A482/9387/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The Court directed the parties to appear before the lower court for verification of a compromise deed and recorded statements to ensure terms were fulfilled. No coercive action was permitted during the verification period. The case was disposed of without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Parties directed to appear before lower court for compromise verification; no coercive action permitted during period.

Abhishek Tyagi and 2 Others Vs State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:113991

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9387 of 2021

¶4

Applicant :- Abhishek Tyagi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Singh,Jitendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar Tyagi

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, 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 applicant to quash the summoning order dated 13.01.2021 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Garhmukteshwar, Hapur as well as entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 74 of 2018 (Meenakshi Vs. Abhishek and others), under section 406 IPC, Police Station Bahadurgarh, District Hapur pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Garhmukteshwar, Hapur.

¶8

On 04.08.2021 the following order was passed:-

¶9

"1. Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants submits that marriage was performed on 22.02.2016 and divorce petition was filed on 07.04.2018, then a case for adultery was filed by the husband against the wife on 09.04.2018, thereafter, on 08.05.2018, wife filed a case under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354, 377 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, in which matter, applicants had approached this Court, where High Court had directed for obtaining bail for husband and have stayed the proceedings qua other applicants. After expiry of 20 days on 28.05.2018, a compliant has been filed under Section 406 IPC with a view to obviate the proceedings and allegations, on which proceedings of adultery and divorce are pending.

¶10

2. Issue notice to the respondent no.2 on payment of P.F. within seven days by registered post A.D., returnable within four weeks.

¶11

3. List in the week commencing 20.09.2021.

¶12

4. As an interim measure, proceedings in Complaint Case No.74 of 2018 (Meenakshi vs. Abhishek and Others), under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Bahadurgarh, District Hapur shall remain stayed. "

¶13

The aforesaid interim order was extended from time to time. During pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the parties have amicably settled their dispute in one of case being Complaint Case No. 3605 of 2018 (Meenakshi Tyagi Vs. Abhishek and others), under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and 354A I.P.C., Police Station Hapur Kotwali, District Hapur pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Hapur and the aforesaid proceedings have been quashed by order dated 05.04.2023 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Application u/s 482 No. 40081 of 2018.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the present case the parties have also 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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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 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

¶17

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?

¶18

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.

¶19

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.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 23.5.2023 Arti

¶22

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

Abhishek Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Tyagi and 2 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harish Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Devandra Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Hamdoshana @ Hamida Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anshu Kumar and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Raj and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mobeen @ Bhura Vs State of U.P.