Disposed

Vijay Kumar Maurya and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2024/708/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Section 482 CrPC application by directing the Trial Court to verify the alleged compromise filed by the parties. No coercive action was ordered against the applicant for six weeks pending verification.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed with directions to Trial Court to verify compromise within two weeks; no coercive action for six weeks.

Vijay Kumar Maurya and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:53050

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 708 of 2021

¶4

Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Maurya And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Alka Rani,Kanchan Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Adarsh Kumar Maurya,Rakesh Kumar Maurya

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant(s)/petitioner(s) for quashing the entire Criminal Case No. 9767 of 2020, State Versus Vijay Kumar Maurya and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 447 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, relating to Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Sultanpur, pending in the court of 1st Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.17, Sultanpur including charge sheet dated 5.11.2020.

¶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. 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 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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 2.8.2024

¶19

Mohit Singh/-

¶20

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

Vijay Kumar Maurya and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar Maurya and Others v. State of U.P. 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

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar @ Balley and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Lal Bahadur Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sushil Kumar Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ravi Gupta and Others Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Moinuddin and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Homes Lko. and Another

Shiv Shanker and Ors. Vs State of Up and Anr.