Disposed

Israil Khan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2024A482/1550/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 to quash criminal proceedings arising from a 2014 Gonda FIR after parties reached a private compromise. Citing Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the court disposed of the petition directing parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the compromise within a stipulated period.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings kept in abeyance for three months; parties directed to trial court on 10.6.2024 for compromise verification; fresh quashing petition permitted with verification report.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39778

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1550 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Israil Khan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shahid Salam,Ajahar Husain,Kavita Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

The present application has been filed by the applicants for quashing of the criminal proceedings of Case No.104 of 2017 under Section 308, 325,324, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Colonelganj, District Gonda arising out of charge-sheet no.200 of 2014 dated 12.11.2014 arising out of F.I.R. No.365 of 2014 under Section 324, 308, 323 I.P.C. Police Station Colonelganj, District Gonda as well as charge-sheet and summoning order on the basis of compromise.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that dispute between the parties have been amicably settled outside the court by way of compromise. The original/certified copy of the compromise dated 1.9.2022 is on record as Annexure-4 to the application.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2 does not dispute the above fact rather he concedes the same.

¶10

It is jointly prayed by the parties' counsel that on the basis of compromise the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has no objection, however, he submits that it will be appropriate that compromise is verified first by the competent court and only then any further orders may be

¶12

passed.

¶13

On due consideration of the arguments advanced by the parties' counsel and perusal of the record and considering the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333 , the petition is disposed of directing the parties to appear before the learned trial court on 10.6.2024 for verification of the compromise. Learned trial court shall verify the contents of the compromise in the presence of parties within a period of two weeks' thereafter and provide a copy of verification report to the parties.

¶14

The proceedings impugned (supra) shall be kept in abeyance for the period of three months from today.

¶15

It will be open for the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings by filing a fresh petition along with verification report given by the learned trial court and also the compromise entered between the parties.

¶16

Office is directed to return original/certified copy of the compromise to learned counsel for the applicants and retain a photocopy thereof, under Rules of the Court.

¶17

Order Date :- 24.5.2024 Madhu

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Israil Khan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Israil Khan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raju Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Sandeep Sahu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Nirmal Das @ Govind Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lko and Ors.

Smt. Gudiya Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home, Civil Sectt, Lko.

Mukesh Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. and 3 Others

Ramprasad Alias Balla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. U.P. Lko.