Allowed

Saddam Khan @ Kafeel Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2024A482/3605/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings after recording the satisfaction that a dispute has been amicably resolved. The court directed the trial court to verify the compromise report within a week and kept the proceedings in abeyance for three months, allowing the applicant to approach this Court again.

What did the court decide?

Impugned proceedings quashed; parties directed to verify compromise in trial court within one week; proceedings in abeyance for three months.

Saddam Khan @ Kafeel Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:30893

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3605 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Saddam Khan @ Kafeel Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Ashish Kumar Debey

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

1.Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Ashish Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 who filed vakalatnama today in court which is taken on record, as also learned A.G.A., and perused the record.

¶7

2.The instant petition has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Case Crime No.0097 of 2022 under sections 363, 366 I.P.C., P.S. Huzurpur, district Bahraich, pending in the court of Addl. Sessions Judge, FTC-I, Bahraich (S.T.No.325 of 2022) State versus Saddam Khan alias Kafeel Khan.

¶8

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved outside the court by way of compromise which is on record. It is submitted that on the basis of the compromise, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶9

4.Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 concedes that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and he has no objection if the impugned proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise after its verification from the competent court.

¶10

Learned A.G.A has also no objection in case the impugned proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise, subject to its verification by the concerned court.

¶11

5.Accordingly, having due regard to the submissions made by the parties' counsel, perusal of the compromise as also considering the law laid down by Supreme Court in (2012)10 SCC 303 Gian Singh versus State of Punjab and another, the petition is disposed of with direction to

¶12

the parties to appear before the trial court on 06.5.2024, which shall verify the compromise in presence of the parties within the next one week. The trial court shall provide a copy of the verification report to the parties. A copy of compromise be placed on record of the trial court. It will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶13

For a period of three months, impugned proceedings shall remain in abeyance.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 19.4.2024 kkb/

¶16

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

Saddam Khan @ Kafeel Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saddam Khan @ Kafeel Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

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

Guddu Alias Dharmendra Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P. Lucknow and 3 Others

Pavnesh Kumar Yadav @ Chintu vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahmood vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Ankit Das @ Govind vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Balram vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Swami Nath Patwa vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 4 Others