Allahabad High Court
ANGAD KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- DEEPAK VERMA
Holding
The High Court held that no interference was warranted and dismissed the Section 482 application.
Summary
The applicant filed a Section 482 CrPC application seeking to quash a summoning order dated 17.03.2021 and a subsequent revision order, as well as the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 825 of 2020 under Section 4 of the D.P. Act. The applicant had earlier been referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, where he failed to deposit the required money, yet continued to enjoy an interim order for about two years. The court examined the complaint and statements under Sections 200 and 202 of the CrPC and found a prima facie case of offence against the applicant. Consequently, the High Court held that no interference was warranted and dismissed the application. The court, however, directed that if the applicant surrenders within three weeks, his bail application will be considered expeditiously, and no coercive action will be taken during that period.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the lower court's summoning and revision orders.
- Whether the applicant's non‑compliance with the mediation order and the existence of a prima facie case under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC justify dismissal of the quash petition.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 200, 202, 482
- D.P. Act — s. 4
Subjects
- Section 482 CrPC
- quash petition
- mediation and conciliation
- non‑compliance
- bail
- coercive action
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33923 of 2024
Angad Kumar Gupta
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kedar Nath Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Brijesh Kumar Mishra, G.A., Vijyeta
Gupta
Court No. - 74
HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants; learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the record.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the
impugned summoning order dated 17.03.2021 passed by the Judicial
Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge (Junior Divisionj, Court No. 20, Deoria
and the order dated 29.07.2024 passed by the Additional District and
Session Judge/FTC 2nd Deoria in Criminal Revision No. 173 of 2021
(Angad Kumar and another Versus State of U.P. and another) as well as
entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 825 of 2020 "Munna Lal Versus
Angad Kumar" U/S 4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Deoria,
Pending before the Judicial Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge (Junior
Division), Court No. 20, Deoria.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that vide order dated 11.11.2024, the
matter was referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court,
Allahabad. As per Mediation report dated 13.12.2024, the applicants have
not complied the order dated 11.11.2024 with regard to deposit of money,
hence the notices could not be issued to the opposite parties. On the requ
est of the applicants, the matter was referred to Mediation and C
onciliation Centre. In the garb of chances of settlement between the
parties, the applicants got interim order and did not deposit amount before
the Mediation and Conciliation Centre as directed by the Court. About
two years, applicants have enjoyed the interim order keeping the Court in
A482 No. 33923 of 2024
2
dark. The act of the applicant is not fair and cannot be accepted. On
perusal of complaint as well as statement recorded under Sections 200
Cr.P.C. and 202 Cr.P.C., prima facie, offence is made out against the
applicants.
3. No interference is warranted by this Court.
4. The application is, accordingly, dismissed.
5. However, if the applicant surrenders before the concerned court within
three weeks from today and applies for bail, the bail application shall be
decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law laid
down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central
Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC
922.
6. For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of
the applicant before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action
shall be taken against him.
(Deepak Verma,J.)
May 14, 2026
Meenu Singh
Digitally signed by :-
MEENU SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…