Allowed

Amit Srivastava v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2023A482/673/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an applicant's application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings under Section 138 N.I. Act. The court held that since the parties had amicably settled their dispute via the Court's mediation centre, the entire case along with the summoning order and non-bailable warrant were quashed.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings, summoning order dated 18.09.2019, and NBW dated 30.11.2021 passed in Criminal Case No. 2909 of 2018 were quashed.

Amit Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:142760

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 673 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Amit Srivastava Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar,A Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri A Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Amit Srivastava with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the entire proceedings in Criminal Case No. 2909 of 2018 under Section 138 N.I. Act, P.S. Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai as well as quash the summoning order dated 18.09.2019 along with the NBW dated 30.11.2021 passed by learned CJM, Jalaun at Orai and with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application.

¶9

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 10.01.2023 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶10

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 02.06.2023 the parties have amicably settled their dispute and agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them in view of settlement agreement dated 02.06.2023.

¶11

As per the office report dated 18.07.2023, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record.

¶12

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 02.06.2023 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded. The

¶13

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-c of the said mediation report.

¶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 applicant(s).

¶16

The present application is allowed.

¶17

The entire criminal proceedings, summoning order dated 18.09.2019 as well as NBW dated 30.11.2021 passed in the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 18.7.2023 M. ARIF

¶20

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit Srivastava v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Srivastava 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

Ram Phool and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Devratia Vs State of U.P.

Yatendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rahul and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S K.D.P. Buildwell Ptv. Ltd. and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another