Allowed

Alok Barman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC11 Sept 2024/3/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS and Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings and a summoning order under Sections 494, 495, and 496 of IPC. Relying on a verified compromise dated 20.07.2024, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed the entire proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The instant petition is allowed; the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 8711 of 2008 and the summoning order dated 16.02.2009 are quashed.

Alok Barman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:63163

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 3 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Alok Barman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manish Mani Sharma

¶5

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Shri Manish Mani Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2.

¶8

The instant petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. / Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed praying for quashing of the impugned summoning order dated 16.02.2009 in Complaint Case No.8711 of 2008 in Re: Smt. Kiran Dhar Vs. Alok Barman, under Sections 494, 495, 496 of I.P.C., Police Station Mahila Thana, District Lucknow as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case on the ground of compromise dated 20.07.2024 arrived at between the parties.

¶9

It is contended that this Court vide order dated 29.07.2024 has required the said compromise dated 20.07.2024 to be verified by the learned trial court and the report to be submitted before this Court.

¶10

In pursuance thereof, as per the office report dated 03.09.2024, the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow, vide letter dated 31.08.2024, has submitted the report per which the compromise dated 20.07.2024 has been verified.

¶11

Incidentally, as per the said report, the case number has been indicated as Criminal Case No.3805163 of 2010 in Re: Kiran Dhar Vs. Alok Barman which is said to be the new number for Case No.5163 of 2010 (CN No.8711 of 2008) by the learned counsels for the contesting parties as emerges from perusal of annexure 2 to the petition (page 23).

¶12

Learned counsels for the contesting parties also state after the aforesaid compromise, no further dispute now exists between the parties and that the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed.

¶13

Considering the compromise dated 20.07.2024 which has been verified by the learned court vide order dated 30.08.2024, which is on record, the instant petition is allowed. The entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.8711 of 2008 (new number is Criminal Case No.3805163 of 2010) in Re: Smt. Kiran Dhar Vs. Alok Barman, under Sections 494, 495, 496 of I.P.C., Police Station Mahila Thana, District Lucknow as well as the summoning order dated 16.02.2009, pending in the court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow are quashed.

¶14

Order Date :- 11.9.2024 S. Shivhare

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Alok Barman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Barman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Hamanshu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rajendra Prasad Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Bhagwan Prasad Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Nafis vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Arvind Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another