Disposed

Khubaib Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jan 2025/251/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of an application under S. 482 CrPC seeking quashing of criminal proceedings, citing a compromise. The Court directed the trial court to verify the compromise with signatories before allowing its effect and granted a one-month stay on coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of application; directed trial court to verify compromise; stay on coercive action for one month.

Khubaib Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2114

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 251 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Khubaib Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abdul Alim Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Mohd. Anas Siddiqui, Advocate on behalf of opposite party nos.2 and 3 is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant application has been filed for quashing the impugned charge sheet dated 17.04.1993 arising out of Case Crime No. 31/1993, Under Sections 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Kaisarganj, District- Bahraich as well as the entire further criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1524 of 2004 "State Vs. Anis & Others" pending before the learned Civil Judge (S.D)/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baharaich.

¶9

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.3 to the application.

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

The court concerned in that scenario will allow the parties to

¶13

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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 13.1.2025 V. Sinha

¶17

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

Khubaib Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khubaib Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

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

Akhilendra Gupta and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pawan Kumar and 34 Others vs Mr. P. Guruprasad, Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and Another

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

Deepak and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. a.C.S./Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Omkar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Ravi Vishwakarma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another