Allowed

Pramod Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2024A482/6226/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On the parties verifying a compromise in a criminal case involving sections 420, 467, 468, and 477-A IPC, the Allahabad High Court allowed the application to quash the summoning order and entire proceedings against the applicant.

What did the court decide?

The summoning order dated 12.04.2019 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1619 of 2018 against the applicant are quashed.

Pramod Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:61263

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6226 of 2024 Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sumit Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pawan Kumar Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Shri Manjul Kumar Pathak, Advocate holding brief of Shri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.

¶6

The instant petition under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Surakasha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed praying for quashing of the summoning order dated 12.04.2019, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, arising out of Complaint Case No.1619 of 2018 filed under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 477-A I.P.C in Police Station- Nanpara District- Bahraich as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case.

¶7

This Court had passed a detailed order on 19.07.2024 which, for the sake of convenience, is reproduced below:

¶8

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Sachin Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, Advocate who files his Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 2.

¶9

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant prays for correcting the date of the summoning order in the prayer clause which according to him, should read as 12.04.2019.

¶10

The prayer as made is allowed. Let necessary correction be made during the course of the day.

¶11

Instant application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Surakasha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed contending that the applicant as well as the respondent no. 2 have entered into a compromise, a copy of which is annexure 5 to the application pertaining to complaint no. 1619 of 2018 filed under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 477-A I.P.C in Police Station-

¶12

Nanpara District- Bahraich.

¶13

Further contention is that although the case has been filed against four persons yet it is only the applicant and the respondent no. 2 who have entered into the said compromise and as such, the instant application would only be confined with respect to the compromise pertaining to the applicant and the respondent no. 2.

¶14

The aforesaid compromise having been entered into between the applicant and the respondent no. 2 is also agreed to by Sri Sachin Srivastava, Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 2.

¶15

Considering the aforesaid, the parties may appear before the A.C.J.M. Bahraich in Case No.1619 of 2018 on 30.07.2024 i.e. the date suggested by the learned counsel for the parties, for verification of the compromise.

¶16

Learned Court below shall verify the compromise and submit its report within next 3 weeks.

¶17

List this case on 27.08.2024 as fresh.

¶18

Till the next date of listing of the case, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned proceedings.

¶19

When the case is next listed name of Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, Advocate be printed in the cause list as counsel for opposite party."

¶20

In pursuance thereof, the report of learned Additional Civil Judge / A.C.J.M., Bahraich dated 07.08.2024 is on record per which it has been indicated that vide order dated 30.07.2024, which is made part of the report, the compromise as had already been entered into between the parties has been verified.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid report of the learned Additional Civil Judge / A.C.J.M., Bahraich dated 07.08.2024 and the fact that the parties have entered into compromise as contended by learned counsels for the contesting parties, the instant petition is allowed. The summoning order dated 12.04.2019, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, arising out of Complaint Case No.1619 of 2018 filed under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 477-A I.P.C in Police Station- Nanpara District- Bahraich as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case are quashed.

¶22

Order Date :- 5.9.2024/S. Shivhare

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pramod Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar 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

Brij Bhushan Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Angad Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and Another

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

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

Jibreel Ahmad @ Bhunnu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home and Anr.

Ram Prasad Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another