Disposed

Yusuf v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2024A482/8116/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under S. 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings based on a compromise deed, the High Court refused immediate quashing. Instead, it directed the trial court to verify the compromise in the presence of parties before deciding. No coercive action was ordered against the applicant for one month.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with a direction to the trial court to verify the compromise in the presence of parties before allowing quashing.

Yusuf vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:73626

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8116 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Yusuf

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Alishah Faruqi,Razi Ahmad

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Suhail

¶7

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit and short counter affidavits filed by learned counsel for the parties are taken on record.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶10

The instant application has been filed for quashing the criminal proceedings arising out of Crime No. 154/2023 under Sections 307/504 IPC & 4/25 Arms Act, P.S.- Hussainganj, Lucknow pending before learned A.D.J., Court No. 15, Lucknow on the basis of the compromise deed.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant 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.

¶12

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.

¶13

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.

¶14

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 applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 7.11.2024 Arpan

¶18

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

Yusuf v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yusuf v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

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

Sunil Kumar Vs Ms. Amrita Singh, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Unnao

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Santosh Kumar Singh Vs Chiranjeev Nath Sinha, Addl. Superitendent Police Dist. Barabanki

Satya Prakash Vishwakarma Vs Rajeev Kumar Srivastava, Addl. General Manager R.B., I.T.I., Ltd. Durbhash Nagar Rae Bareli

Kasim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lucknow

Sushma Devi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another