Disposed

Girish and 4 others v. State of U.P and 7 others

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2024/8543/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashment of criminal proceedings due to alleged settlement. The court held that the authenticity of the compromise requires verification by the trial court and directed parties to appear before the trial court to file and verify the deed within four weeks, with a stay on coercive measures for eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of; parties directed to verify compromise before Trial Court; no coercive action for 8 weeks.

Girish and 4 others Vs State of U.P and 7 others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:65712

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8543 of 2024 Applicant :- Girish And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 7 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anita Singh Nagore Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Heard.

¶6

The instant application has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶7

"WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may Kindly be pleased to quash the impugned criminal proceeding in Session Trial no. 15/2020, arising out of case crime no. 0092/2018, U/s 147, 148, 149, 323,504,308,325 I.P.C., at P.S- Fatehpur-84, District Unnao, in the matter of State vs. Vinod Kumar and others, pending before the Additional session judge court no.1, District Unnao, may kindly be decided in terms of compromise, between the O.P. no. 2 to 8 and the petitioners they have entered into compromise and they have settled their dispute outside the court as such, they do not want to contest the case further. Annexed as Annexure No.4."

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants 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, the instant application is disposed of finally in following terms:-

¶11

(i) The parties to the proceedings i.e. Session Trial no. 15/2020 (supra), shall appear before the concerned Court within four weeks from today and file the compromise.

¶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

¶14

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 applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶17

(vi) Office is directed to provide original compromise, if any, to the Counsel for the applicants, after retaining its photocopy on record. It is for the purposes for its verification by the concerned court.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 23.9.2024

¶20

Jyoti/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Girish and 4 others v. State of U.P and 7 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girish and 4 others v. State of U.P and 7 others

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

Ravikant Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

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

Anand Kumar @ Sattan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Manglesh Kumar @ Ranjeet Goswami Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Vashi Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Shivam Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another