Allowed

Kul Gaurav and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2022A482/3533/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a criminal case and cognizance order following a successful mediation settlement between the disputing parties. The order directs the Family Court to expedite the related divorce petition.

What did the court decide?

Charge sheet and cognizance order were quashed; Family Court directed to decide Section 13-B petition within 30 days.

Kul Gaurav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3533 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Kul Gaurav And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised. No one appears on behalf of the applicants to press this application.

¶6

Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned counsel for the State is present.

¶7

The matter is thus being decided finally on the basis of records with the assistance of learned State Counsel.

¶8

Perused the records.

¶9

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the quash the charge sheet no. 25 of 2018 dated 30.05.2018 as well as cognizance order dated 24.10.2018 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad in Case No. 9920 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act arising out of Case Crime No. 07 of 2018, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Allahabad and with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application.

¶10

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 27.01.2020 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶11

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 26.08.2022 the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them in view of interim settlement agreement dated 27.05.2022.

¶12

As per the office report dated 18.09.2022, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record.

¶13

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 26.08.2022 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute

¶14

arising in the present matter. The parties have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in para 7(f) of the said mediation report.

¶15

Further, from perusal of the mediation report shows that although the mediation between the parties has been successful and a settlement agreement dated 26.08.2022 has been drawn before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court after interim settlement dated 27.05.2022 but a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act is pending before the Family Court, Allahabad which has been filed in it.

¶16

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, it is provided that the Family Court, Allahabad shall decide the petition 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act filed between the parties, by fixing early date/expediting the same. The parties shall be at liberty to file certified copy of this order before the Family Court concerned which shall then proceed with the matter by fixing an early date and make an endeavour to conclude the same within 30 days of filing of the certified copy of this order.

¶17

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.

¶18

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(s).

¶19

The present application is allowed.

¶20

The charge sheet no. 25 of 2018 dated 30.05.2018 as well as cognizance order dated 24.10.2018 passed in the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.

¶21

However the Principal Judge, Family Court concerned is directed to expedite the hearing of the said case and decide the

¶22

same within 30 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶23

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

¶24

Order Date :- 19.9.2022 M. ARIF