Applicants sought quashing of a Jhansi trial under Sections 384 IPC and 66 of the Information Technology Act on the basis of a compromise. The court found the settlement verified by the trial court, the complainant unwilling to proceed, and quashed the entire pending proceedings.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:178223
Court No. - 78
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6819 of 2024
Applicant :- Vinod Gautam And Anothers Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Harish Chandra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajendra Prasad Maury
Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
of 2018, tilted as State of U.P. v. Vinod Gautam and another, under Sections 384 IPC and 66 of Information Technolgy Act, P.S. Nawabad, District Jhansi, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, against the applicants, are hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 12.11.2024 Ujjawal
Justice Vinod Diwakar
Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Should proceedings of Case No. 2402 of 2018 under Sections 384 IPC and Section 66 IT Act be quashed given the parties' verified compromise?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vinod Gautam And Anothers
State of U.P.
Opposite Party no. 2 (unnamed complainant)
Vinod Diwakar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
