Disposed

Ahmad and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2024A482/40263/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge fixed time for affidavits and interim relief restraining coercive measures against applicants pending verification of a post-charge-sheet compromise. The matter was not disposed of; it lists for admission on a future date.

What did the court decide?

4 weeks time for counter affidavits, 2 weeks for rejoinder; interim stay on coercive measures; matter listed for admission; parties to verify compromise before court below.

Ahmad and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40263 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Ahmad And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Kumar Kuntal,Surendra Mohan Sharma

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Ashish Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Mahesh Kumar Kuntal, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Piyush Kumar Shukla, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the first informant/opposite party-2 by filing his Vakalatnama in Court today which is taken on record.

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

Applicants- Ahmad And 5 Others, who are charge sheeted accused, have approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:-

¶9

"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the present Criminal Misc. Application and be pleased to quash the charge sheet no.120 of 2024 dated 19.07.2024 submitted in Case Crime No.104 of 2024, under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 452, 504, 506, 336, 427, 308, 354B of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Fatehpur Sikari, District Agra, cognizance order dated 12.09.2024 and entire proceeding of Case No.18103 of 2024 (State Vs. Ahmad and others) pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7, Agra in pursuance of compromise taken place between the parties on 06.11.2024.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicants submits that during pendency of above mentioned criminal case, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the court. On the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. In view of above an application dated 6.11.2024 was jointly filed by the parties before court below praying therein that proceeding of above mentioned criminal case, be terminated in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶11

According to the learned counsel for applicants though the

¶12

application dated 06.11.2024 has been filed before court below seeking termination of the proceeding, no order has been passed by the court below in the light of the aforementioned application till date. Consequently, applicants have approached this Court by means of the present application.

¶13

Per contra, the learned AGA contends that since some of the charging Sections are cognizable and non-compoundable, therefore, by virtue of the above and also the prohibition contained in Section 320 Cr.P.C., no illegality can be set to have been committed by court below in not terminating the proceedings of abovementioned criminal case in the light of the application dated 6.11.2024.

¶14

However, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2 submits that once the first informant/opposite party-2 has himself entered into a compromise with the accused applicants, therefore, he can not have any objection in case the present application is allowed in terms of the compromise entered into by the parties.

¶15

Be that as it may, the crux of the matter is that the parties have entered into a compromise which has been acted upon. The Apex Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641 has given detailed guidelines with regard to compromise in criminal matters. It is now well settled that compromise can be entered into by the parties even in respect of cognizable and non compoundable offences but subject to certain restrictions imposed by the apex court.

¶16

Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned AGA for State, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that matter requires consideration.

¶17

Notice on behalf of opposite party-1 has been accepted by the learned AGA.

¶18

Mr Piyush Kumar Shukla,Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the first informant/opposite party-2.

¶19

They pray for and are granted 4 weeks' time to file their respective counter affidavits.

¶20

Applicants will have 2 weeks time thereafter to file their

¶21

rejoinder affidavits.

¶22

List for admission on 16.1.2025 before the appropriate bench.

¶23

Considering the facts of the case as noted hereinabove, it is hereby provided that parties shall appear before the court below on 20.12.2024 along with a certified copy of this order for verification of the compromise entered into by them.

¶24

In case the parties appear before the court below on the next date fixed then court below shall proceed to verify the compromise entered into between the parties. In case compromise entered into between the parties stands verified the court below shall transmit true copy of the compromise verification order as well as it's verification report to this Court on or before the next date fixed.

¶25

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions urged by the learned counsel for the applicants in support of this application, as noted hereinabove coupled with the fact that parties have entered into a compromise which has been acted upon, as an interim measure, it is hereby provided that until further orders of this Court, no coercive measure shall be adopted by court below against applicants in Case No.18103 of 2024 (State Vs. Ahmad and others), under Sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 324, 354B, 336, 427, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Fatehpur Sikri, District Agra, now pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7, Agra.

¶26

The matter shall not be treated as tied up or part heard to this bench.

¶27

Assignment, if any, stands discharged.

¶28

Order Date :- 26.11.2024 S.A.

¶29

Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ahmad and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahmad and 5 Others v. State of U.P. 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

Subhan and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sevati Lal and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Smt Eram and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahtab and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Mewa Lal Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Mukim and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another