Allowed

Tara Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Aug 2022A482/360/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought to quash criminal proceedings under Section 498-A IPC and other charges. The High Court, relying on a successful mediation report confirming a settlement between the parties and citing settled law, allowed the application and quashed the entire proceedings and charge sheet.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings under Case No. 4653 of 2017 and the attached charge sheet are quashed.

Tara Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 360 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Tara Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

No one appears on behalf of the applicants to press this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Sri Raj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the State is present.

¶7

Sri Pankaj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the private respondent is also not present even when the matter has been taken up in the revised list.

¶8

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

¶9

Perused the records.

¶10

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the entire proceeding of the Case No. 4653 of 2017 (State Vs. Ambikeshwar and another), under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act arising out of Case Crime No. 3536 of 2016, Police Station Kotwali, District Basti as well as the impugned charge sheet pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti and with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application.

¶11

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 10.02.2021 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶12

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 16.04.2022 the parties have amicably settled their dispute and agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them in view of interim settlement agreement dated 28.03.2022.

¶13

As per the office report dated 04.8.2022, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record which states that mediation between the parties is successful.

¶14

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 16.04.2022 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising in the present matter. The parties have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in para 6-f of the said mediation report..

¶15

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.

¶16

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).

¶17

The present application is allowed.

¶18

The entire proceedings as well as charge sheet of the aforesaid passed in the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 10.8.2022 M. ARIF

¶21

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD ARIF Date: 2022.08.10 17:39:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tara Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tara Devi 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

Raja Ram Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Jagat Singh and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sumit Raghav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jahuri Alias Kanishak Pal Singh Vs State

Shashank Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akram and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another