Disposed

Meraj Khan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2024A482/1543/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings under Sections 323, 324, and 504 IPC was disposed of by directing the lower court to verify the compromise deed filed by the parties. Coercive action against applicants was stayed for three months pending verification.

What did the court decide?

Coercive action stayed for 3 months; direction to lower court to verify compromise.

Meraj Khan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:16178

¶2

Court No. - 28

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1543 of 2024 Applicant :- Meraj Khan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kavita Mishra,Ajahar Husain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶5

Power filed by Shri Shahid Alam, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The present application has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.3766 of 2015 (State vs. Meraj and others), charge sheet and summoning order dated 17.09.2015 arising out of charge sheet no.189 of 2014, filed in pursuance to NCR No.183 of 2014 under Sections 323, 324, 504 I.P.C. pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda in terms of compromise deed dated 01.09.2022.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and a compromise has been arrived between them dated 01.09.2022 (Original copy of the same is appended as annexure No.4 to the application).

¶9

Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the Court below, before which, the case is pending. Therefore, the compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court below itself.

¶10

Counsel for opposite party no. 2 has no objection, in case compromise takes place.

¶11

Both the parties are directed to appear before the concerned court below on 04.03.2024 and file/pursue their compromise application. The court below is directed to pass an order on the said compromise application and all formalities will be completed within two months weeks from that date. The concerned Magistrate will sent a report to this Court whether the said compromise took place or not.

¶12

Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it or has been already filed, it

¶13

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 that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record. The court 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 applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶14

For a period of three months, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶15

Registry is directed to return the original copy of the compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicants after taking photocopy of the same.

¶16

Order Date :- 22.2.2024 Pks

¶17

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SETH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Meraj Khan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meraj Khan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Chandra Mauli Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

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

Fakhruddin Alias Wahid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Others

Meraj Khan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Udit Mohan Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ram Abhilakh Vishwakarma and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another