Disposed

Ghanshyam Maurya and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Jun 2024A482/5414/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash charge-sheet under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 DP Act along with summoning order. Parties claimed amicable compromise. Court directed trial court to verify the compromise with signatories present, after which applicants may approach again for quashing. Coercive action stayed for one month; original compromise deed returned to counsel.

What did the court decide?

Compromise verification directed at trial court; no coercive action for one month; liberty to reapply for quashing if compromise verified.

Ghanshyam Maurya and Another vs State of U.P. Thru… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:43832

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5414 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ghanshyam Maurya And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Raziullah,Gayasuddeen,Zartab Qamar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bipin Kumar Rai,Prabhakar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 04.03.2020 filed in Case Crime No.243/2019, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 of DP Act, Police Station Nigoha, District Lucknow as well as summoning order dated 26.07.2021 passed by A.C.J.M.-Ist, Lucknow.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that both the parties have amicably compromised their dispute. The compromise which has taken place between the parties is also filed before this Court 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 trial court concerned as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.

¶10

Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the trial court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it 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.

¶11

The court concerned 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.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 21.6.2024

¶15

V. Sinha

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ghanshyam Maurya and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghanshyam Maurya and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. 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

Jamshed @ Ghamandi vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Pankaj Kumar Shukla and Others vs Shri Govind Ram, District Inspector of School, D.I.O.S., Balrampur

Anil Kumar Gupta and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Mohd. Atif and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Rudresh Kumar Nigam @ Rudresh Nigam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Smt. Jannatul Nisha vs Smt. Virinda Shukla, S.P., Bahraich