Disposed

Ajay Tripathi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2024/6015/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of an application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings based on an alleged post-filing compromise. It directed the trial court to verify the settlement within two weeks of appearance, stayed coercive action for six weeks, and allowed the applicant to approach the High Court again if verification fails.

What did the court decide?

Coercive action stayed for six weeks; applicant directed to verify compromise before trial court within two weeks of appearance.

Ajay Tripathi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:46656

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6015 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ajay Tripathi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Sri Pranav Mishra, Advocate has put in appearance for the private opposite party no. 2 and has filed his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s), learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant(s)/petitioner(s) for allowing this application u/s 528 B.N.S.S. and quash the entire criminal proceeding of the Charge Sheet dated 17/06/2022 filed by I.0. as well as Crl. Misc Case no. 18112/2022, arising out of in case crime No. 163/2022, (State Versus Ajay Tripathi and others) pending in the Court of A.C.J.M Bahraich, Under Section 323,504,506 IPC, related to P.S- Payagpur, District - Bahraich

¶9

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.3 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.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

from today.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 9.7.2024 Anuj Singh

¶21

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

Ajay Tripathi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Tripathi and 2 Others 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

Mithai Lal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Dhananjay Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Master X Juvenile in Fir No. 255/2019, Thru. Father Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Others

Mohd. Waseem @ Vasim and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Akbar Ali and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Tauheed Alam and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others