Disposed

Faisal Ansari and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2024/10007/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of an application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The court deferred the decision on quashing, directing parties to appear before the trial court within four weeks to deposit and verify the alleged compromise deed.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of by ordering parties to appear in trial court to file and verify compromise within four weeks; coercive action stayed for eight weeks.

Faisal Ansari and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:76829

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10007 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Faisal Ansari And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prateek Tewari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

Instant application has been preferred by the applicant(s)/petitioner(s) for quashing entire impugned criminal proceedings of Case No. 90387/2023, arising out of Case Crime No.88/2022 under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354, 342 IPC & Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S.-Mahila Thana, District-Lucknow Middle (Commissionerate Lucknow) as also the charge sheet No. 01 dated 27.02.2023 including summoning order dated 27.07.2023.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant(s) submitted that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and have entered into a compromise and a copy of compromise deed, duly signed by the parties, is annexed as Annexure No.4 to the present application. As such, keeping in view the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in this regard, the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed.

¶9

Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the Trial Court as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.

¶10

Considering the aforesaid, this application is disposed of finally in following terms:-

¶11

(i) The parties to the proceedings in issue shall appear and file the compromise before the concerned Court within four week's from today.

¶12

(ii) If the parties appear before the concerned Court in terms of above, the concerned Court shall proceed to verify the compromise between the parties to the proceedings and prepare

¶13

a report to the same effect and the original compromise deed be made part of record.

¶14

(iii) The concerned Court shall conclude the process of verification of compromise within two week's from the date of production of copy of this order.

¶15

(iv) The concerned Court shall permit the parties to the proceedings to obtain the certified copy of the report as well as compromise deed.

¶16

(v) It shall be open to the applicant(s) to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶17

(vi) Office is directed to provide original compromise, if any, to the counsel for the applicant(s), after retaining its photocopy on record. It is for the purposes for its verification by the concerned Court.

¶18

(vii) For a period of eight weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case.

¶19

Order Date :- 21.11.2024 Vinay/-

¶20

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

Faisal Ansari and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Faisal Ansari and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raghavendra Kumar Dixit S/O Tribeni Shankar Dixit Vs the State of U.P.

Lalit Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Homes Lucknow and Another

Saleem Ahmad and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Chotkannu Vs State of U.P.

Vikash Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Prakash and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others