Allowed

Mohd. Jamal Ahmad and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2022/3629/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in matrimonial dispute, High Court quashed FIR, charge sheet and summoning order due to settlement agreement entered through mediation between husband and wife regarding living together and child care.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of summoning order dated 13.9.2021, charge sheet dated 26.9.2020 and entire criminal proceedings arising from FIR.

Mohd. Jamal Ahmad and Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 35

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3629 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Jamal Ahmad And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anuj Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Umesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The instant proceedings arise out of a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner no.1 and the opposite party no.2, who are the husband and wife respectively.

¶7

On 29.8.2020, the opposite party no.2 had lodged an F.I.R. under Sections 498-A,323,506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Ambedkar Nagar, pursuant to which the police submitted a charge sheet against the applicants on 26.9.2020 and the learned Civil Judge (J.D.) Fast Track-I, Ambedkar Nagar has passed an order on 13.9.2021 summoning the applicants.

¶8

On 1.10.2021, this Court has passed an order referring the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Center of the High Court.

¶9

On 27.11.2021, the Mediation and Conciliation Center has sent a report stating that mediation stands completed and the parties have entered into an agreement, which has been enclosed with the report.

¶10

A perusal of the settlement agreement dated 27.11.2021 entered into between the applicant no.1 and the opposite party no.2 indicates that the aforesaid parties have agreed to live together happily and they will take care of their child namely; Mohd. Araham and both of them will take all steps necessary for shaping his future in the best possible way. The parties have further agreed to withdraw all the pending cases filed against

¶11

each other including that they have no further claims or demands against each other with respect to Criminal Misc. Case No. 3629 of 2021, under Sections 482 Cr.P.C. and all the disputes and differences in this regard have been amicably settled by the parties hereto through the process of mediation and conciliation.

¶12

In view of the aforesaid settlement agreement entered into between the parties in the Mediation and Conciliation Center of this Court, the application is allowed.

¶13

The summoning order dated 13.9.2021 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fast Track-I as well as the charge sheet dated 26.9.2020 and the entire criminal proceedings arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0028 of 2020, are hereby quashed.

¶14

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 1.2.2022 Arjun/-

Mohd. Jamal Ahmad and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Jamal Ahmad and Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Soni Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Secy and Another

Liyaqat Ali Vs State of U.P. and Ors.

Sushil Kumar Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Thru Addt Chief Secy Govt of U.P. Civil Secy and Another

Prabhat Kumar Bajpaaye and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt. and Another

Mahendra Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Anr.

Ram Pheran Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home and Another