Allowed

Arun and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2019A482/22554/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings in a matrimonial dispute. Noting that the parties had settled their differences via a mediation agreement, the court held that quashing the proceedings was necessary to restore peace and avoid a waste of time.

What did the court decide?

The criminal case no. 3281 of 2019 involving charges u/s 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC is quashed in terms of the settlement agreement.

Arun and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22554 of 2019 Applicant :- Arun And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶3

List revised. None appeared for the opposite party no.2 even in the revised call, although opposite party no.2 was present before the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court.

¶4

Perusal of the record further reveals that matter was referred to Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court. In proceedings before the Mediation Centre, parties came to terms and a settlement agreement was executed on 26.8.2019, which is on record. As per settlement agreement, Rs.1,60,000/- against the agreed amount of Rs.2,00,000/- has been paid by the applicant no.1 to the wife. Remaining amount of Rs.40,000/- is agreed to be paid at the time of disposal of the petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. As per clause (f) of settlement agreement, parties also agreed that all the cases pending between them shall be withdrawn by them by taking appropriate steps.

¶5

Since it was a matrimonial dispute / private dispute and the same has been settled between the parties; a divorce petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act is pending; none present on behalf of opposite party no.2 despite service of notice, therefore no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicants has also placed reliance on the law laid down by Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012), 10 SCC 303, B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582.

¶6

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶7

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record.

¶8

In all the aforesaid cases, the Apex Court has laid down the law that criminal proceedings may be quashed even in non-compoundable cases by the High Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction to restore peace between the parties and in case the justice so demands. According to Hon'ble Supreme Court, if the offence involve private dispute between the parties of commercial nature or matrimonial dispute and it is not related to heinous offence, the proceedings may be quashed.

¶9

Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably and mutually settled, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting to continue the criminal case pending before the trial court and it would simply be a waste of time if the aforesaid case is permitted to continue till its logical conclusion.

¶10

In view of the above, the Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶11

The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3281 of 2019 in pursuance of the charge-sheet dated 03.11.2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 379 of 2018 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Shahar, District Bulandshahr pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr against the applicants are quashed in terms of settlement agreement arrived at between the parties.

¶12

Order Date :- 9.12.2019 / ss

Arun and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dinesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramesh and 6 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Amit Dixit Vs State of U.P.and Another

Ram Sajiwan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Inam and Others Vs State of U.P.and Another