Disposed

Amrish Chandra Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Nov 2024/9704/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed an application for quashing criminal proceedings against the applicant, directing the trial court to verify a filed compromise deed via notice to signatories before any further relief or quashing can be considered.

What did the court decide?

Direction to trial court to verify compromise by issuing notices to signatories; one month suspension of coercive action against applicant.

Amrish Chandra Mishra Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:73143

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9704 of 2024 Applicant :- Amrish Chandra Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey,Swadha Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Trinetra Shankar Pandey, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 11.11.2016 filed in Case Crime No.393A of 2006 under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Lambhua, District Sultanpur as well as summoning order dated 13.12.2006 passed by CJM, Sultanpur in ST No.430 of 2009; State Vs. Ayodhya Prasad and Ors.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that both the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise which has taken place between the parties is also filed before this Court as Annexure No.6 to the application.

¶9

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

¶10

Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the trial court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices 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

¶11

that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record.

¶12

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

¶13

For a period of one month, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶14

OfÏce is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicant, after taking the photocopy of the same.

¶15

Order Date :- 5.11.2024 V. Sinha

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Amrish Chandra Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrish Chandra Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. 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

Pratibha Verma and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Edu. Lko and 55 Others

Miss X (Victm /Complainant in Crime No. 205/2021) Thru. Grandmother Mrs. Siddheshwari Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Vijaya Nand Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Kuldeep Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Victim a Complainant of Complaint Case No. 16030 of 2021 Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Shivam Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.