Allowed

Srikant Yadav and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home. and Others

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2023/1989/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings involving 498-A IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute. This was based on a compromise dated 16.11.2022, where the parties mutually agreed to live separately, settle divorce claims, and facilitate divorce proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the summons order dated 17.02.2021, Charge Sheet No.3 of 2020, and entire criminal case proceedings in light of the compromise.

Srikant Yadav and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1989 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Srikant Yadav And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- B.R. Singh,Devashish Bhatt,Mukesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar Mishra,Sudhir Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Advocate on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of

¶6

By means of the instant application, the petitioners have sought relief of quashing of the summoning order dated 17.02.2021 and Charge Sheet bearing No.3 of 2020, dated 05.07.2020, in Criminal Case No.7764 of 2021, arising out of F.IR. No.1095 of 2018, under Section 498-A, 323, 352 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow.

¶7

The present case was initiated by means of an F.I.R. lodged on 17.09.2018 by the opposite party no.2 against the applicants under Sections 498-A, 323, 352 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. The police investigated the matter and submitted a charge sheet dated 05.07.2020 and the proceedings of criminal case continued thereafter. Hence, this petition was filed.

¶8

It is relevant to mention here that as this matter was of a matrimonial in nature a coordinate Bench of this court has referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on 08.09.2021, where the parties have entered into a compromise on 16.11.2022. As per the compromise between the parties the applicant no.4/husband and the opposite party no.5/wife have decided to live separately and in that regard they have filed a divorce petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow with mutual consent. It is also agreed that the husband shall pay a sum of Rs.23,00,000/- to his wife the opposite party no.5 as permanent alimony. It is also agreed between the parties that the parties shall facilitate each other in the divorce proceedings and they shall be bound by the mediation agreement dated 16.11.2022. The

¶9

settlement/compromise in original is placed before this court.

¶10

Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute to the aforesaid facts and they have no objection to the application being allowed in terms of the compromise.

¶11

Accordingly, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed on the basis of the compromise dated 16.11.2022. Resultantly, the summoning order dated 17.02.2021 and Charge Sheet bearing No.3 of 2020, dated 05.07.2020 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.7764 of 2021, arising out of F.IR. No.1095 of 2018, under Section 498-A, 323, 352 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow are hereby quashed.

¶12

Order Date :- 4.1.2023 Ram.

¶13

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Srikant Yadav and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srikant Yadav and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home. and Others

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. Sunita Mishra Thru. Her Daughter Smt. Jyoti Mishra Vs Abhishek Mishra and 4 Others

Abdul Haleem and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Lko and Another

Rukhsar Bano Thru. Her Husband Ekhlak Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Smt. Neelam Chaturvedi Vs the State of U.P. and Ors.

Abeer Gupta Thru. Natural Guardian Ankur Gupta and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Anamika Thru. Arun Dubey and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others