Allowed

Smt. Naseema Khatoon and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024/2396/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court Applicant sought to quash criminal proceedings involving matrimonial allegations. The Court noted a settlement agreement dated 03.10.2024 arrived at the Mediation Centre and exercised its inherent powers to quash the pending proceedings as no useful purpose would be served.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.1503 of 2024 including the summoning order dated 25.01.2024 and charge sheet dated 21.11.2023.

Smt. Naseema Khatoon and 3 Others Vs State of U.P… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:76290

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2396 of 2024 Applicant :- Smt. Naseema Khatoon And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Ministry Of Home Affairs And Another Counsel for Applicant :- S.Mohd Kazim,Pramod Kumar,Syed Jamal Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Lav Upadhyay,Rakesh Kumar Nayak,Ved Prakash Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.1503 of 2024 pending before CJM, Ambedkar Nagar including the summoning order dated 25.01.2024 and charge sheet dated 21.11.2023 arising out of Case Crime No.195/2023 under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 and 406 IPC as well as Section 3/4 of DP Act, P.S.- Baskhari, District- Ambedkar Nagar.

¶7

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature. This court vide order dated 01.10.2024 had referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court where settlement agreement had arrived on 03.10.2024 between the parties, it is on record.

¶8

The parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them. The said fact has been mentioned in para- 7 of the settlement agreement dated 03.10.2024.

¶9

Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 . Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶10

In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the mediation, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the settlement agreement arrived at between the parties on 03.10.2024 before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, the present application is allowed and the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.1503 of 2024 pending before CJM, Ambedkar Nagar including the summoning order

¶12

dated 25.01.2024 and charge sheet dated 21.11.2023 arising out of Case Crime No.195/2023 under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 and 406 IPC as well as Section 3/4 of DP Act, P.S.- Baskhari, District- Ambedkar Nagar are hereby quashed.

¶13

OfÏce is directed to communicate this order to trial court, forthwith.

¶14

Order Date :- 19.11.2024 V. Sinha

¶15

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Naseema Khatoon and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Naseema Khatoon and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dilip Chhugani vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Dan Bahadur Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Janardan Bajpai vs Inder Jeet Singh, Administrator / Nagar Ayukt, Nagar Nigam, Lko. and Others

Smt. Naseema Khatoon and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs and Another

Pankaj Kumar Alias Pankaj Kumar Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Surendra Kumar Mishra and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Cane Development Lko. and 3 Others