Disposed

Piyush Panchal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home and Another

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2024/10874/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC. The single-judge High Court did not decide on the merits of the compromise but disposed of the application by directing the trial court to verify the alleged settlement and observing that coercive action is stayed pending verification.

What did the court decide?

Directing the trial court to verify the compromise and stay coercive action for eight weeks; applicant may approach the Court again for quashing.

Piyush Panchal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:79360

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10874 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Piyush Panchal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Sri Manoj Kumar, learned Advocates has filed their Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant application has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶9

"For the facts, reasons and circumstances as stated in the accompanying affidavit it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 18.06.2022 and summoning order dated 20.06.2023 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.67697/2023 State of U.P. Vs Piyush Panchal pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IV Room No.28 Lucknow which is arising out of case crime no.239/2021 in offence under section 498-A, 504, 506, 323 I.P.C. & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 Police Station Vikas Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶10

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Criminal Case No.67697/2023 State of U.P. Vs Piyush Panchal pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IV Room No.28 Lucknow till disposal of instant petition before this Hon'ble Court, as it is desirable in the interest of justice."

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and have entered into a compromise. 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.

¶12

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.

¶13

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

¶14

(i) The parties to the proceedings i.e. Criminal Case No.67697/2023 (supra), shall appear before the concerned Court within six week's from today and file the compromise.

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 29.11.2024 Jyoti/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Piyush Panchal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Piyush Panchal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Saroj Vs Smt.Deoki

Arvind Pratap Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Anr.

Ram Roop Vs Sessions Judge Shrawasti and Anr.

Rakesh Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Piyush Panchal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home and Another

Shamshad Khan Alias Madde vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.