Allowed

Gobind Chandra Patra (as in the Fir ) (Gobind Chandra Patra as in the Adhar ) v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Apr 2024/932/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court of Judicature at Allahabad quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and D.P. Act upon verification of a compromise deed between the applicant and the opposite party, relying on Supreme Court precedents regarding settlement in matrimonial disputes.

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings instituted in FIR No. 0142/2021 are hereby quashed.

Gobind Chandra Patra (as in the Fir… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:29835

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 932 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Gobind Chandra Patra (As In The Fir ) (Gobind Chandra Patra As In The Adhar )

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶6

Counsel for Applicant :- Vatsaly Srivastava,Anil Kumar Tiwari,Rahul Mishra,Rudresh Pandey

¶7

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Adarsh Srivastava

¶8

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, and learned A.G.A.

¶10

¶11

This Court vide order dated 02.02.2024 passed the following order:-

¶12

"Heard Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Adarsh Srivastava, who has filed 'Vakalatnama' on behalf of opposite party no. 2, the same is taken on record.

¶13

The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned summoning order dated 1.11.2023 passed by the C.J.M., Lucknow in F.I.R. No. 0142/2021, P.S. Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow (South Commissionerate) in Case No. 118339 of 2023, State vs. Gobind Chandra Patra u/s 498A,323, 504 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act and the charge-sheet dated 11.4.2021 and for staying the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner and opposite party no. 2 have amicably compromised their dispute on 24.1.2024. The compromise taken place between the parties has been annexed with this

¶14

petition as Annexure No. 8. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has also agreed on the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that parties have entered into a compromise.

¶15

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 parties concerned before the Court. Accordingly, for the purpose of verification of the compromise, petitioner no.1 as well as opposite party no.2 will appear before the court concerned on 9.2.2024 along with original compromise deed and the learned court below shall proceed to verify the compromise-deed. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court below and the same shall be sent to this Court by the next date of listing. The compromise will be made part of the record. The court below in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise.

¶16

List before this Court on 19.2.2024.

¶17

Till the next date of listing, the applicants shall not be compelled to face the criminal proceedings in pursuance of the aforesaid case.

¶18

When the case is listed next name of Sri Adarsh Srivastava shall be printed as counsel for the opposite party no. 2."

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in compliance of the order dated 02.02.2024, the Court below vide order dated 09.02.2024 verified the compromise. Certified copy of the verification report in on record. He prays that on the basis of compromise and verification report, impugned proceedings may be quashed.

¶20

Learned counsel for respondent no.2 concedes the argument made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶21

Learned counsel for the parties submits that in view of the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675 , Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677 , Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1 , Gian Singh versus State of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and

¶22

another: (2014) 6 SCC 466 , the proceedings pending before learned trial court are liable to be quashed.

¶23

In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise and from perusal of the record it appears that the compromise has been verified by court below and the verification report dated 09.02.2024 is on record as well as law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases (supra), the present petition is allowed and the criminal proceedings (supra) are hereby quashed.

¶24

Order Date :- 15.4.2024

¶25

prateek

¶26

Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gobind Chandra Patra (as in the Fir ) (Gobind Chandra Patra as in the Adhar ) v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gobind Chandra Patra (as in the Fir ) (Gobind Chandra Patra as in the Adhar ) 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Jumman and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Mukesh Jain Alias Baua Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Santosh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. Lko.

Saurav Jaiswal @ Saurabh Jaiswal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Vimal Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others