Allowed

Nageena and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2022A482/5598/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 498-A, 323, and 506 IPC arising from domestic issues. The court quashed the case after parties entered into a settlement via the mediation centre, subject to the condition that the related pending matrimonial case in Family Court be disposed of expeditiously within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings under Case No. 574 of 2020, charge-sheet no. 01 of 2019, and cognizance/summoning order dated 09.01.2020 are quashed. Family Court directed to decide the matrimonial case with

Nageena and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5598 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Nageena And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhay Kumar Kushwaha

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Abhay Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the private respondent are not present. Sri S.B. Maurya, 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

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 in Criminal Case No. 574 of 2020 (State Vs. Nageena and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0326 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Rohaniya, District Varanasi, pending in the Court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi as well as charge-sheet no. 01 of 2019 dated 12.10.2019 along with cognizance and summoning order dated 09.01.2020. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application.

¶9

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 05.08.2021 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶10

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 28.07.2022 the parties have entered into an settlement dated 28.07.2022 in view of Interim Settlement dated 07.07.2022 and have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶11

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 28.07.2022 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising out in the present matter. The parties have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in para 7 (e) of the said mediation report.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicants states that a case under Section 13-B of the

¶13

Hindu Marriage Act is pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi as Matrimonial Case No. 1199 of 2022. Learned counsel assures that the applicants shall abide by all the terms and conditions of settlement agreement arrived at between the parties before the mediation centre of this Court and shall fully co-operate with expeditious disposal of the said case pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi. He prayed that a direction for expeditious disposal of the same be given.

¶14

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.

¶15

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 applicants.

¶16

The present application is allowed.

¶17

The proceedings of the present case as well as charge-sheet dated 12.10.2019 along with cognizance and summoning order dated 09.01.2020 are hereby quashed.

¶18

However the Principal Judge, Family Court, Varanasi is directed to expedite the hearing of the said case and decide the same within 30 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 19.9.2022 AS Rathore

¶21

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR Date: 2022.09.20 14:03:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nageena and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nageena and 2 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gyan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Manvendra @ Pintoo Mistri Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ganga Singh and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Aquib Vs State of U.P.