Disposed

Karunesh Rai and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2024A482/1143/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash summoning order, charge sheet and proceedings under Sections 323/504 IPC arising from a family property dispute. Court referred parties to Mediation Centre with a Rs.20,000 deposit, prescribed staged disbursement conditions, stayed coercive action pending listing.

What did the court decide?

Matter referred to Mediation Centre; coercive action stayed till next date of listing subject to deposit and participation conditions.

Karunesh Rai and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 28

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1143 of 2024

¶3

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

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Rajat Gangwar,Vikas Vikram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶6

(1) Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

(2) The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is being preferred by the applicants seeking the quashing of summoning order dated 19.01.2024 passed by the learned Special C.J.M. Custom, Lucknow and charge sheet dated 29.6.2020 as well as entire criminal proceeding in Criminal Case No.69782 of 2022 (State vs. Karunesh Rai and others), arising out of Case Crime No.0106 of 2020, u/s 323, 504 I.P.C., P.S.-Gazipur, DistrictLucknow pending in the court of learned Special C.J.M. Custom, Lucknow, so far as it relates to the applicants.

¶8

(3) Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the inter-se relationship between Karunesh Rai (applicant no.1) and Vidyotma Awasthi (opposite party no.2) is bother-in-law and sister-in-law. There is serious misunderstanding between two real sisters Vandana Rai (applicant no.2) and Vidyotma Awasthi (opposite party no.2) with regard to ancestral property. It is contended by learned counsel for applicants that there is every likelihood that the ice may be melted and relationship may be congenial between the parties, if an opportunity be given to them to sit across the table before the Mediation Centre of this Court.

¶9

(4) Considering the nature of differences and nature of prosecution between the parties, the Court feels that in the interest of justice let an opportunity be granted to settle their misgiving and "issue" (if any) in an amicable and congenial way. Thus, it is directed that applicants shall deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/- latest by 20.02.2024 with the Mediation Center, of which the entire amount shall be paid to the opposite party no.2 only after mediation process is over before the Mediation Center. The Court expects that both the parties would render necessary assistance to settle their discord once and for all.

¶10

(5) It has come to the notice of this Court that the parties are

¶11

coming to the process of mediation in most non-serious way and premeditated mind. The Court refers the matter to the Mediation Centre with hope and trust that the parties would utilize this process and platform to have some fruitful result. The process of mediation is not for earning the amount deposited by the applicants. If the opposite parties are coming to the Center with different design in their mind and for only receiving the amount, deposited by the applicants, then this practice has to be deprecated and condemned. Thus, it is directed that if the opposite parties are coming and participating the process of mediation, then the entire amount would not be handed over to them in one go, and the same would be handed over to them in following manner :

¶12

(a) If opposite parties approaches the Mediation Center in only one date and submits that they are no more interested in the process of mediation or absented themselves from successive occasions without any justifiable reasons, then only 50% of the entire amount deposited by the applicants, would be handed over to them or their representatives or counsel and rest amount would go to the applicant.

¶13

(b) If the contesting parties are coming and participating in the process of mediation for two or more occasions, then only the opposite parties would be entitled for full amount;

¶14

(c) If despite of the due notice to opposite parties, they do not appear without any justifiable reasons, then the entire amount would be refunded to the applicant.

¶15

(6) The matter is remitted to the Mediation Center with the direction that the Mediation Center shall conclude the mediation and conciliation proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months after giving notices to both the parties. Only after the aforesaid amount is deposited by the applicants, notice shall be issued to the parties by the registry of Mediation Center. It is made clear that the Mediation Center is required to submit its report within three months.

¶16

(7) Thereafter, the case shall be listed in the fourth week of May, 2024 along with the report of Mediation Center before appropriate Court.

¶17

(8) Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in aforesaid case, so as to enable the parties to break the ice between them.

¶18

(9) In case the aforesaid amount is not deposited by the applicants within the aforesaid period or after depositing the aforesaid amount they fail to participate in the mediation

¶19

process without any justifiable reason or prior notice, the entire amount would be fortified in the account of Mediation Center and the matter would be remitted to the court concerned immediately and interim order shall be deemed to be vacated automatically. There is no need of any formal order for vacating the stay by the Court. If the process of mediation fails and aborted, the criminal proceeding against the applicants would resume to its fulfledge.

¶20

Order Date :- 12.2.2024 M. Kumar

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Karunesh Rai and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karunesh Rai and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. 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

Smt. Manjusha Gupta and Another vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lucknow and Another

Sachin Alias Sachin Kumar and Others vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Ashutosh Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Harshit Bhardwaj vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lucknow

Kaleem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Smt. Kalpana Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. the Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another