Allahabad High Court
Anuj Agrawal Alias Annu And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 June, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:96279 Court No. - 47 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 20401 of 2025 Applicant :- Anuj Agrawal Alias Annu And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Chandra Prakash Srivastava,G.A. Hon'ble Avnish Saxena,J.
1. Sri Neeraj Kumar Srivastava, learned Advocate appeared and submits that the applicants and opposite party no. 2 are relatives and there was some disputes between them, which has ended in compromise. The opposite party no. 2 has registered an N.C.R. No. 57 of 2011 against the applicants at police station Aonla, District Bareilly. During investigation, sections 325, 323, 504, 452 and 308 I.P.C. have been figured out and charge sheet has been submitted accordingly.
2. The applicants then approached this Court by means of an Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 44825 of 2023 (Anuj Agrawal @ Annu and another vs. State of U.P. and another). The co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.02.2024 found that there is a compromise between the parties and therefore, directed the parties for filing compromise and also directed the court concerned to verify the said compromise. The relevant paragraph nos. 7 and 8 of the order are reproduced herein below :-
“7. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, both the parties are directed to appear before the Court concerned along with compromise deed as well certified copy of this order within three weeks from today. It is expected that Court concerned may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of the parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the Court concerned shall also record the statements of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not.
8. The court 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 applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.”
3. The compromise between the parties is at page no. 36 duly verified by the Court of Judicial Magistrate-Ist, Aonla, Bareilly vide order dated 27.02.2024.
4. Sri Chandra Prakash Srivastava, learned Advocate is present for opposite party no. 2 and conceded the submissions made by Sri Srivastava.
5. Learned AGA for the State is also present.
6. As the matter has been compromised between the parties arising out of family dispute, as such the charge sheet no. 90 of 2011 dated 2nd May, 2011 under Sections 325, 323 and 504 I.P.C. along with supplementary charge sheet no. 90-A of 2012 dated 14.10.2012, under Sections 452 and 308 I.P.C. leading to Case No. 469 of 2011 (State vs. Anuj Agrawal and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 353 of 2011, Police Station Aonla, District Bareilly are quashed in view of the compromise entered into between the parties.
7. The present application is allowed.
Order Date :- 11.6.2025
Manoj
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
[ad_1]
Source link