Allowed

Abhishek Nigam and Ors. v. State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. Home and Ors.

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2022CRLP/15368/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an FIR registered under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The court ordered quashing because the matrimonial dispute was amicably settled via a compromise agreement before the Family Court, leading to a mutual withdrawal of criminal cases.

What did the court decide?

The impugned First Information Report dated 16.06.2021 was quashed subject to the condition that parties abide by the terms of the compromise dated 18.10.2022.

Abhishek Nigam and Ors. Vs State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15368 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Abhishek Nigam And Ors. Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. Home And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Girish Kumar Pande,Prashant Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Anshumali Srivastava,Arshad Hussain

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Prashant Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Anshumali Srivastava, learned counsel for the private respondent and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record..

¶6

By means of the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the First Information Report dated 16.06.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 0088 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Bahraich.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that an application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been filed by the petitioner and opposite party no.3 jointly before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that since the matrimonial dispute between the parties from which the impugned F.I.R. emanates, has been amicably settled before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and the parties have entered into a settlement agreement/ compromise on 18.10.2022 and according to Clause No.C of the settlement agreement /compromise dated 18.10.2022, the parties have agreed to withdraw all the criminal cases filed by them against each other, the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.

¶8

Learned counsel for the respondent No.3, Mr. Anshumali Srivastava, could not dispute the fact and he states that the impugned FIR be quashed as he has no objection to it subject to

¶9

the condition that all the terms and conditions which have been laid down in the compromise have to be complied with. In retaliation to this, learned counsel for the petitioner states that all the terms and conditions have been complied with.

¶10

From the perusal of the record, it is apparent that parties have entered into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably. As per the compromise dated 18.10.2022, the parties have decided to part their ways and live separately for which they have already filed a Suit under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act and the ward namely Priyansh would be given in the custody of her mother for which the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.16,50,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs and fifty thousand) towards the expenses of bringing up and education of the their ward. By way of compromise, it has also been agreed that neither of the parties or their relatives or family members, shall institute any malicious prosecution, in the form of any criminal or civil proceedings against each other and the parties shall not have any further claims or demands against each other.

¶11

In view of of the above, since the matrimonial dispute between the parties from which the impugned F.I.R. has emanated, has been settled amicably before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this court and the parties have entered into the settlement agreement/ compromise dated 18.10.2022 under which they have agreed to withdraw all the criminal cases filed by them against each other, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding any further against the petitioners in this matter.

¶12

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Impugned First Information Report dated 16.06.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 0088 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Bahraich, is hereby quashed , subject to the condition that the parties shall abide by the terms and conditions of the compromise dated 18.10.2022 made before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court.

¶13

(Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 2.11.2022 A.K. Singh

¶15

Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.14 12:29:45 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Abhishek Nigam and Ors. v. State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. Home and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Nigam and Ors. v. State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. Home and Ors.

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

Smt.Madhuri Vs State of U.P.

Kranti Devi and Anr. Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Ors.

Ajay Kumar Singh @ Ajay Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secretary Home Deptt. and Ors.

Sachin Kumar @ Sachit Kumar and Anr. Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secretary Home and Ors.

Smt.Laxmi Devi and Ors. Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow and Ors.

Mohit and Ors. Vs State of U.P. Thru Secretary Home and Ors.