Raju Rawat and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2024A482/5913/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court bench disposed of a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking to quash criminal proceedings and summoning orders. Relying on an alleged out-of-court settlement, the court directed the Trial Court to verify the compromise within two weeks and ordered a six-week stay on coercive actions pending such verification.

What the court decided

AI extract

Raju Rawat and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45413

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5913 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Raju Rawat And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Imran Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Sri Mohd. Vakar Khan, Advocate, has put in appearance for the private opposite party no. 2 and has filed his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicants/petitioners to stay the proceedings of Charge Sheet dated 25.03.2019 as also Criminal Case No. 42793 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 516 of 2018, under Section 323, 504, 354(Ga) IPC, Police Station-Ashiyana, DistrictLucknow as well as summoning order dated 20.08.2019 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (C.B.I./A.P.), Lucknow.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and have entered into a compromise and a copy of compromise deed, duly signed by the parties, is annexed as Annexure No. 5 to the present application. As such, keeping in view the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in this regard, the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed.

¶10

Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the Trial Court as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid, this application is disposed of finally in following terms:-

¶12

(i) The parties to the proceedings in issue shall appear and file the compromise before the concerned Court within two week's

¶13

from today.

¶14

(ii) If the parties appear before the concerned Court in terms of above, the concerned Court shall proceed to verify the compromise between the parties to the proceedings and prepare a report to the same effect and the original compromise deed be made part of record.

¶15

(iii) The concerned Court shall conclude the process of verification of compromise within two week's from the date of production of copy of this order.

¶16

(iv) The concerned Court shall permit the parties to the proceedings to obtain the certified copy of the report as well as compromise deed.

¶17

(v) It shall be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶18

(vi) Office is directed to provide original compromise to the counsel for the applicants, after retaining its photocopy on record. It is for the purposes for its verification by the concerned Court.

¶19

(vii) For a period of six weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶20

Order Date :- 4.7.2024 Vinay/-

¶21

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

Raju Rawat and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Raju Rawat and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nafis Ahmad Alias Mohammad Nafis Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 4 Others

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

Rajesh Jaiswal @ Gudda Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lucknow

Suraj Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Taslimunnisa and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Shaleesh Ahmad and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another