Quashed

Sheikh Taha v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2024A482/4487/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Common Order disposed of two connected applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings for 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The Court allowed the applications and quashed the proceedings following a complete settlement and successful mediation.

What did the court decide?

Charge sheet, cognizance order, and entire criminal proceedings against applicants are quashed. Applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are allowed.

Sheikh Taha vs State of Up and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:129484

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4487 of 2024 Applicant :- Sheikh Taha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh,Shivam Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Qamrul Hasan

¶4

Connected With

¶5

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45810 of 2023 Applicant :- Mohammad Ahmad And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aparna Burman,Sanjay Singh,Shivam Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Qamrul Hasan

¶6

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶7

Both the aforesaid applications U/s 482 Cr.PC. arise from same case therefore, the same are being decided by this common order.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2/informant and learned AGA for the State.

¶9

Both the aforesaid applications have been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 14.2.2023, cognizance order dated 20.9.2023, as well as entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 283 of 2022, under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Kotwali, District-Prayagraj, pending in the court of A.C.J. (J.D.)-21, Allahabad.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the matter pertains to matrimonial dispute. Applicant-Sheikh Taha is the husband of informant/opposite party no. 2 and applicants Mohammad Ahmad and Ruksana are the father-in-law and motherin-law of opposite party no. 2. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 5.1.2024 the matter was referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Allahabad High Court. The mediation has been successfully completed and both the parties have

¶11

compromised the matter and in this connection, the report of mediation centre along with settlement agreement is on record. It was submitted that as per terms and conditions of settlement, the applicants have already paid an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rs. two lacs) and all the conditions of settlement have been complied with. It was submitted that in view of these facts and circumstances of the case, no useful purpose would be served for keeping the impugned proceedings pending and thus, the same may be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties.

¶12

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 /informant has concurred with the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter and thus, impugned proceedings against applicants may be quashed on the basis of compromise.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has no objection if parties compromise the matter.

¶14

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

¶15

In the instant case, it appears that matter relates to matrimonial dispute, which is private in nature. If parties compromise the matter, it would not have adverse impact on society. There is nothing to indicate that parties have any criminal antecedents. The informant does not want to proceed with the case against the applicants. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 5.1.2024 the matter was referred for Mediation and Conciliation and the mediation has been successfully completed and both the parties have compromised the matter and in this connection, the report of mediation along with settlement agreement is on record. As per terms and conditions of settlement, the applicants have already

¶16

paid an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rs. two lacs) to the informant and all the conditions of settlement have been complied with. Considering the law laid down in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296 and the facts of the matter, it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed, as the continuance of the same would be nothing but wastage of time of Court.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned charge-sheet/cognizancesummoning order and entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case against applicants, namely, Sheikh Taha, Mohammad Ahmad and Ruksana are, hereby, quashed.

¶18

Both the aforesaid application u/s 482 Nos. 4487 of 2024 and 45810 of 2023 are hereby allowed .

¶19

Order Date :- 8.8.2024 Faridul

¶20

Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sheikh Taha v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheikh Taha v. State of Up 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

Smt Indresh and Another vs State of Up and Another

Devendra Kumar and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Hamender Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Tomar and Another vs State of Up and Another

Sandeep Jaiswal Alias Sandeep Kumar Jaiswal vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashkar Hussain and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another