High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:93895 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 17599 of 2025 Applicant :- Alok Kumar Joshi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jayant Pareta,Sachin Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- Aditi Kesarwani,G.A.,Naveen Kumar Upadhyay Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 19.12.2020 and summoning order dated 17.02.2021 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 130 of 2021 (State Vs. Alok Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No.0565 of 2020 under Sections 323, 352, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Panki, District Kanpur on the basis of compromise pending in the Court of Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kanpur Nagar. 3. On 19.05.2024 this Court passed the following order:- "While going through the order in Application u/s 482 No.2272 of 2025, it was observed that a compromise had been entered into between the parties but only concerning two individuals. The case stems from an FIR filed by the opposite party no.2 against two named individuals and two unknown persons. Following the investigation, a charge sheet was filed against three individuals, namely, Alok Kumar Joshi, Supreem Chaurasiya and Amar Singh. It appears that the parties have amicably resolved the dispute, but the compromise pertains only to two accused persons i.e. Alok Kumar Joshi and Amar Singh. Despite this, an application u/s 482 No.2272 of 2025 was filed in Court without disclosing that the compromise was limited to just these two individuals. Notably, Advocates Mr. Jayant Pareta and Navin Kumar Upadhyay were present during the proceedings, who have not disclosed about the aforesaid fact and have obtained an order dated 10.02.2025 from this Court, directing the parties to appear before the concerned Court for verification of the compromise. In compliance with the said order, the compromise was duly verified. However, neither the order of this Court nor that of the concerned lower Court reflects this crucial fact that the compromise was only in relation to two of the three accused. Moreover, it was also not brought to the Court?s attention by either party?s counsel whether the victim had received any compensation or not. Time and again, it has been observed that certain lawyers, without addressing the core issue as in the present case enter into a so-called compromise among a few parties. However, such a compromise is neither proper nor fair, as it deliberately excludes one of the parties, seemingly with the intent to extract money from the excluded party. Learned counsel for the parties pray to withdraw this application, which cannot be permitted at this stage as the compromise deed itself is not legal as has been entered between the parties, on which the order dated 10.02.2025 has been passed by the earlier Court. Let this matter be placed as fresh on 26.05.2025 as a first case, along with Application u/s 482 No.2272 of 2025, showing the name of Mr. Navin Kumar Upadhyay, Advocate, as counsel for the opposite party no.2. " 4. In compliance of aforesaid order application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No.2272 of 2025 (Alok Kumar Joshi and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another) has been placed alongwith present case today. 5. Perusal of the record go to show that the compromise deed is not genuine as it has been entered into between the informant and two accused persons leaving behind another accused. 6. This Court finds that the order in Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No.2272 of 2025 (Alok Kumar Joshi and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another) was obtained from co-ordinate Bench of this Court by concealing of aforesaid fact and accordingly, such compromise has been verified by court concerned vide order dated 18.04.2025. 7. Thus, order dated 10.02.2025 is set aside, directing the court concerned to verify the proper and genuine compromise deed, which is entered into between the informant and three other accused persons, if filed by the parties. 8. In view of the above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with copy of compromise deed as well as a certified copy of this order. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from today. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statement of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not? 9. Meanwhile, the District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar shall also verify and send a report to this Court as to whether the opposite party no.2 has received any compensation or not, and in case it is found to have been received, same has been returned or not. In case the compensation amount is not returned, the concerned District Magistrate is directed to proceed in accordance with law to recover the same and send a report accordingly before the Court concerned. 10. Learned A.G.A. as well as Registrar (Compliance) of this Court shall look into compliance of this order. 11. The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the order verifying the compromise deed and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. 12. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
Decision
13. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of. 14. Needless to say that in case a proper compromise deed has not been filed by the parties, the Court concerned is directed to proceed in accordance with law. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 Imtiyaz Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad