Disposed

Shyam Pal Singh and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2024A482/7910/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court did not quash the FIR in this section 482 application. Instead, the High Court directed the parties to verify the alleged private settlement before the competent trial court within four weeks and obtained a report before considering final quashing.

What did the court decide?

The parties are directed to verify the compromise before the trial court within four weeks and submit a report permitting the applicant to approach the court again.

Shyam Pal Singh and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:61258

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7910 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shyam Pal Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Ajai Pratap Singh Chauhan,Kunwar Samitinjay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Sri Sumit Chauhan, Advocate and Shri Nitin Singh, Advocate have put in appearance for the private opposite party no. 2 and has filed Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard.

¶8

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short "BNSS") has been preferred by the applicant(s)/petitioner(s) for quashing the charge sheet dated 26.11.2010 (Annexure No.1) arising out of Case Crime No. 356 of 2010 under Sections 323, 504, 506 & 308 I.P.C and Section 3(2)V SC/ST Act registered at Police Station-Mall District-Lucknow (State vs Shyam Pal Singh and others) in Session Trial No. 29 of 2012 pending before Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant(s) 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. 4 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

¶12

in following terms:-

¶13

(i) The parties to the proceedings in issue shall appear and file the compromise before the concerned Court within four week's 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 applicant(s) to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 5.9.2024

¶21

Mohit Singh/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shyam Pal Singh and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Pal Singh and Others 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

Sandeep Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Mohan Lal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Arvind @ Arvind Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Srvesh and Others vs Shri Masoom Ali Sarwar, M.D., U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Lko.

Sachendra @ Satendra Bajpai and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Ali Husain and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another