Allowed

Ghanshyam Jaiswal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Aug 2022A482/1612/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an order imposing payment conditions under Section 126 Cr.P.C. The parties had reached a settlement via mediation, agreeing to withdraw pending cases. The High Court held that quashing was warranted due to the settlement.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 23.10.2019 in Restoration Case No. 70 of 2019 and the exparte judgement of 25.09.2018 were quashed.

Ghanshyam Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1612 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Ghanshyam Jaiswal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Tyagi,Deepankar Chaudhary

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. Sri Deepankar Chaudhary and Sri learned counsel for the private respondent are not present.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the order dated 23.10.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Deoria in Restoration Case No. 70 of 2019 (Ghanshyam Vs. Ankita), under Section 126 Cr.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Deoria imposing the condition for payment of Rs. 30,000/- while recalling the exparte judgement dated 25.09.2018. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the recovery of Rs. 30,000/- from the applicant in pursuance of exparte judgement dated 25.09.2018 passed in Maintenance Case No. 217 of 2018 (Ankita vs. Dr. Ghanshyam) under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

¶8

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 14.01.2020 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶9

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 16.03.2021 the parties have entered into settlement dated 16.03.2021 in view of Interim Settlement Agreement dated 19.01.2021 and have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶10

From perusal of the report of Mediation Centre of this Court, it appears that in pursuance of the said order the mediation proceedings were taken up which ended in a settlement dated 16.03.2021 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising out in the present matter. The reference of the present case is in para no. 7 (g) of the final settlement between the

¶11

parties so drawn before the Mediation Centre where they have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶12

The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.

¶13

From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicant.

¶14

The present application is allowed.

¶15

The proceedings of the order dated 23.10.2019 in the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

¶16

Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court within two weeks from today.

¶17

Order Date :- 16.8.2022 AS Rathore

¶18

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR Date: 2022.08.17 12:28:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ghanshyam Jaiswal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghanshyam Jaiswal 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

Govind Dixit and 02 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Vasant Ram and 5 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Ram Prakash and 5 others Vs State of U.P. and another

Sarthak Goel Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Gyan Chandra and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raja Chaudhary and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another