Disposed

Mohd. Ashfaque and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC30 Jul 2024/1515/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and Section 528 BNSS was not disposed of on merits regarding quashing of proceedings. The Court deferred action, directing parties to file a verified compromise before the concerned Court within two weeks for subsequent verification before concluding the application for quashing.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed; parties directed to file compromise before Trial Court within two weeks; coercive action stayed for six weeks.

Mohd. Ashfaque and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:51933

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1515 of 2020

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Ashfaque And Ors. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Nijam Ahamad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Yadav

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short "BNSS") has been preferred by the applicant(s)/petitioner(s) for quashing the order dated 17.12.2019 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Court No.6, Lucknow, Police Station-Tal Katora, District-Lucknow, whereby the revision was dismissed affirming the order dated 07.11.2017 passed by Magistrate for summoning the applicants under Section 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.

¶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. A- 3 to the application for disposal (IA No. 3 of 2023). 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 two week's from today.

¶12

(ii) If the parties appear before the concerned Court in terms of

¶13

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.

¶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 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 six weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case.

¶19

Order Date :- 30.7.2024

¶20

Mohit Singh/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Ashfaque and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Ashfaque and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Shahruf and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Mohammad Istiyak @ Istiyak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Vandana Yadav and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ram Davan Alias Ram Badan and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko. and Another

Ajay Kumar @ Babloo Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Bal Krishna Mishra Alias Billu Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others