Dilip Kumar Jaiswal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48869

Court No. - 30

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3404 of 2023

Appellant :- Dilip Kumar Jaiswal And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rahul Roshan Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Amit Kant Saxena

¶5

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶6

Short counter affidavit filed on behalf of State is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Rahul Roshan Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant; Shri Amit Kant Saxena, learned Counsel for opposite party no.2, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant criminal appeal under Section 14A(1) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as 'SC/ST Act') has been filed against the cognizance order dated 14.04.2022 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sultanpur in Special Trial No.385 of 2022 (State Vs. Dilip Kumar) arising out of FIR No.0103 of 2021, under Sections 420, 504 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)(d), 3(1)(dh) & 3(1)(y) of SC/ST Act (Amended 2015), Police Station Bandhua Kala, District Sultanpur.

¶9

Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has sought quashing of the cognizance order dated 14.04.2022 on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and compromise deed dated 17.08.2022 entered between the parties has been filed as Annexure No.4 to the instant appeal.

¶10

On 01.09.2022, this Court has passed the following order :-

¶11

" Order on Delay Condonation Application No.1 of 2022

¶12

This is an application under Section 5 of Indian Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in preferring the instant appeal under Section 14A of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶13

The foremost contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that in view of Full Bench Judgment of this Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.1000 of 2018 "Ghulam Rasool Khan and others vs. State of U.P. and others", there is no legal restrictions in filing an appeal under Section 14A

¶14

(1) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 beyond statutory limit.

¶15

He, thus, prays that the delay which has occurred in preferring this appeal deserves to be condoned.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that even otherwise the right to prefer an appeal is a valuable statutory right of any aggrieved person.

¶17

Keeping in view the averments made in the accompanying affidavit, the delay in preferring the instant appeal appears to be sufficiently explained.

¶18

Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is allowed and the delay in preferring the instant criminal appeal is hereby condoned.

¶19

Order on Memo of Appeal

¶20

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Amit Kant Saxena, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 today is taken on record.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Amit Kant Saxena, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

¶22

The instant appeal under Section 14 A (1) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Amendment Act, 2015 has been filed against the impugned cognizance order dated 14.04.2022 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Sultanpur in Special Trial No.385 of 2022 "State vs. Dilip Jaiswal" arising out of Case Crime No.103 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (D), 3 (1) (Dh), 3 (1) (v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bandhua Kala, District Sultanpur.

¶23

Learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 jointly submit that nothing as alleged has been committed by the appellants, however, the appellants and the opposite party no.2 have entered into a compromise on 17.08.2022. They have settled their dispute amicably out of the Court and have decided not to contest the case against each other. Copy of the compromise dated 17.08.2022 is on record as Annexure No.3 to the instant application.

¶24

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

¶25

Accordingly, the instant appeal is finally disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, notices be issued to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court concerned and the compromise will be made part of the record.

¶26

The court concerned 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 appellants to approach this Court again for setting aside/quashing of the proceedings.

¶27

The Registry of the Court is directed to return the original compromise deed annexed with the instant appellants to the learned counsel for the appellants after retaining a photocopy of the same on record.

¶28

Meanwhile, if any process is found to be issued against the appellants, the same shall not be given effect to."

¶29

According to the learned Counsel for the appellant, in compliance of order dated 01.09.2022 passed by this Court, learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sultanpur has verified the said compromise vide order dated 26.09.2023, annexed as Annexure No.6 to the instant appeal.

¶30

Learned Counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. do not dispute the aforesaid factum of compromise and submit that no dispute remains between the parties as of now.

¶31

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have amicably settled the dispute by way of compromise entered between the parties which has been verified by the learned trial court vide Annexure No.6 to the appeal, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose would be served in continuance of the proceedings furthermore.

¶32

Accordingly, the order dated 14.04.2022 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sultanpur in Special Trial No.385 of 2022, arising out of FIR No.0103 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)(d), 3(1)(dh) & 3(1)(y) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bandhua Kala, District Sultanpur, is hereby set aside.

¶33

The appeal stands allowed .

¶34

(Om Prakash Shukla, J.)

¶35

Order Date :- 19.7.2024 Anand Sri./-

¶36

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

Dilip Kumar Jaiswal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Kumar Jaiswal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sadrun Nisha and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mohd. Anees Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Kamlesh and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Ishhaq Alias Ishhaq Ahmad and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Yasoob Abbas and Others Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Others