Disposed

Aniruddh Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC6 May 2024A482/4107/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court stayed the impugned arrest order and referred the matrimonial dispute to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre. The applicant was directed to deposit Rs. 1 lakh of the claimed amount to proceed with mediation.

What did the court decide?

The application for quashing the arrest order was disposed of; proceedings stayed pending mediation. Applicant directed to deposit Rs. 1 lakh.

Aniruddh Kumar Dubey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4107 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Aniruddh Kumar Dubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Afrin Bano Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Afrin Bano, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The applicant Aniruddh Kumar Dubey has filed this application with the prayer to quash the impugned notice/order dated 15.4.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate III, Faizabad issuing arrest warrant against the applicant in Complaint Case No. 444/2021 as contained in ANNEXURE NO. 1 to the petition.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that his client/applicant is a poor person and he is not in a position to give such a huge amount of Rs. 2.36 lacs, however, he ready to give Rs. 1 lac, out of Rs 2.36 lacs, fixed by the learned trial court in the order dated 15.4.2024. He further prays for mediation in the case and submits that the remaining amount of Rs. 1.36 lacs shall be paid as per the settlement arrived at between the parties. (copy of order dated 15.4.2024 is filed at page-13 to the application).

¶9

To show his bona fide, the applicant's counsel submits that the applicant will bring a draft of Rs. 1 lac in the name of opp. party No. 2 Smt. Soni Dubey, which shall be handed over to her on the first date of appearance before the Mediation and Conciliation Center. She also submits that as the matter is purely matrimonial in nature and there are some issues between the parties, that can be easily settled by way of settlement by the expert Mediator of this Court.

¶10

Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. also made an agreement with the argument as advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and he submits that as the matter is purely matrimonial in nature, thus, the matter may be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Center of this Court, so that the parties may sit together and may arrive at some conclusion. He also submits that a rider of Rs. 1 lac may be put on the applicant to bring the same by way of bank-draft, out of Rs. 2.36 lacs, as ordered by the learned trial court vide order dated

¶11

15.4.2024.

¶12

After considering the arguments, as advanced by the learned counsel for the parties this court also deems it appropriate that this matter may be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Center of this court, as the matter is matrimonial in nature and there are some minor disputes between the parties, which can be amicably settled.

¶13

Accordingly, the matter is being referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Lucknow. Learned counsel for the applicants will submit the certified copy of the this order alongwith the present application and affidavit within 3 weeks from today at the Mediation and Conciliation Centre and the Mediation and Conciliation Centre will issue notice to both the parties within a week thereafter fixing date in the case.

¶14

The mediator is allowed 2 months' time to find out possible solution of the dispute between the parties and send his report to the court regarding the outcome of mediation.

¶15

Put up this case on 30.07.2024 before appropriate Bench along with report of the mediator.

¶16

In view submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, this court directs that the applicant shall deposit a demand-draft of Rs. 1 lac before the Mediation and Conciliation Center of this Court within 2 weeks from today, out of the amount of Rs. 2.36 lacs, as directed by the trial court order dated 15.4.2024, in the name of opp. party No. 2 Smt. Soni Dubey issued from a Nationalized Bank, which shall be handed over to the opp. party No. 2 by the Mediation Center on her first appearance before it. In respect of the remaining amount, i.e., 1.36 lacs same shall be decided by the Mediators and the parties concerned in terms of settlement.

¶17

If the said demand-draft of Rs. 1 lac is not deposited within the time prescribed by this court, this application shall automatically stand dismissed.

¶18

It is also made clear that the monthly amount fixed by the trial court shall be paid regularly by the applicant to the opp. party No. 2, without fail.

¶19

Till the next date of listing, the proceedings of the impugned notice/order dated 15.4.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate III, Faizabad, against the applicant in Complaint Case No. 444/2021, shall be kept in abeyance in respect of the applicant.

¶20

This case shall not be treated as tied up or part heard with this Bench.

¶21

( Shamim Ahmed, J. )

¶22

Order Date :- 6.5.2024 A.Nigam

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Aniruddh Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aniruddh Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sarwan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

Kurkut Alias Jibreel Khan Alias Jibrail vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Arvind Gautam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

A.R. Enterprises Thru. Its Proprietor Saiyyad Nadeem Shahid Alias Nadeem Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Parashu Ram Rawat and 7 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Rahul Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.