Allowed

Mo. Harun @ Tiger v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2025A227/3825/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition under Article 227 sought quashing of a Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance case. After mediation produced a settlement providing mutual divorce, one-time alimony payment and withdrawal of all cases, the court quashed the maintenance proceedings qua the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings in Case No. 397 of 2022 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the Family Court, Ambedkar Nagar quashed qua petitioner in terms of the settlement agreement.

Mo. Harun @ Tiger Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41142

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3825 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Mo. Harun @ Tiger Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravindra Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Niyaj Ahmad

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

This petition has been filed seeking following main relief(s):-

¶8

"I. issue an order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the proceeding of impugned case no. 397 of 2022 "Rubeena Khatoon Vs. Mo. Haroon @ Tiger" under section 125 Cr.P.C., related to police station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar pending before the Learned Principal Judge Family Court, Ambedkar Nagar as well as complaint under section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the opposite party no. 2, having case no. 397 of 2022 "Rubeena Khatoon Vs. Mo. Haroon @ Tiger" under section 125 Cr.P.C., related to police station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar pending before the Learned Principal Judge Family Court, Ambedkar Nagar (Annexure No. 1 and 2) in the interest of justice.

¶9

II. issue an order or direction to stay the proceeding of case no. 397 of 2022 "Rubeena Khatoon Vs. Mo. Haroon @ Tiger" under section 125 Cr.P.C., related to police station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar pending before the Learned Principal Judge Family Court, Ambedkar Nagar., in the interest of justice."

¶10

It appears that on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court vide its order dated 14.08.2024 referred the matter to Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court so as to carve out possibility of amicable settlement of dispute between the parties. The order dated 14.08.2024 on reproduction reads as under:-

¶11

"Heard Sri Ravindra Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record.

¶12

The petitioner in the instant petition is seeking a direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the proceeding of impugned Case No.397 of 2022 "Rubeena Khatoon Vs. Mo. Haroon @ Tiger", under Section 125 Cr.P.C. related to Police Station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar pending before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ambedkar Nagar.

¶13

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the matter relates to matrimonial dispute and the petitioner has all the intentions to settle the same amicably. Petitioner's counsel strenuously urged that this case may be referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court so that the couple may have a chance to settle their dispute on their own terms through mediation.

¶14

The Court is also satisfied on the basis of the record and the submissions made before it that the nature of litigation is such that there is a chance to resolve the matter through process of mediation and an attempt ought to be made to explore that possibility.

¶15

Accordingly, the matter is being referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Lucknow. Learned counsel for the petitioner will submit the copy of the present petition alongwith affidavit within three 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

¶16

fixing date in the case. The mediator is allowed two 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.

¶17

Put up this case on 25.10.2024 before appropriate Bench along with report of the mediator.

¶18

Till the next date of listing, the proceedings of the aforesaid case i.e. Case No.397 of 2022 "Rubeena Khatoon Vs. Mo. Haroon @ Tiger", under Section 125 Cr.P.C. related to Police Station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar pending before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ambedkar Nagar shall remain stayed in respect of the petitioner subject to the deposition of Rs.30,000/- as expenditure within three weeks by way of a bank draft to the Mediation Centre. It is directed that out of Rs.30,000/- deposited by the petitioner, Rs.25,000/- shall be handed over to the opposite party no.2 on her first appearance and Rs.5,000/- shall be kept by the Mediation Centre.

¶19

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

¶20

It also appears that in compliance of order of this Court dated 14.08.2024, a SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT has been entered into between the parties on 06.02.2025 thereby indicating that the parties were present and they have admitted that they have entered into an agreement voluntarily.

¶21

The relevant contents of the SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT are extracted hereunder:-

¶22

" 6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:

¶23

A) That both the parties solemnized their marriage on 17.02.2020 and now they have agreed to live separately in future and dissolve their marriage with mutual consent. Accordingly the parties have agreed to take further necessary steps for dissolution of their marriage within 15 days from today.

¶24

B) That the First Party/husband has agreed to pay and the Second Party/wife has agreed to receive a total sum of Rs.1,53,286/-(Rupees One Lakh Fifty Three Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Six only) towards one time full and final settlement of all the claims of Second Party against the First Party including the claim for permanent alimony.

¶25

C) That the First Party has paid a sum of Rs.3,286/-(Rupees Three Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Six only) in cash and handed a Demand Draft No.614582 dated 13.01.2025 drawn on Bank of Baroda in the name of Rubeena Khatoon to the Second Party today ie.06.02.2025 toward aforesaid payment of Rs.1,53,286/-(Rupees One Lakh Fifty Three Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Six only). The Second Party acknowledges receipt of the said payment and Demand Draft.

¶26

D) That the First Party has returned all the items/articles/jewellery to the satisfaction of the Second Party The Second Party acknowledges receipt of items/articles/jewellery.

¶27

E) That the First Party has also handed over a motorcycle bearing registration no. UP44BA5523 and given NOC (No Objection Certificate) to the Second Party regarding transfer of the Vehicle. The Second Party acknowledges receipt of the said motorcycle and NOC.

¶28

F) The parties have agreed to withdraw/not press the cases filed against each other. The details of the cases are mentioned hereunder:

¶29

(i) Criminal Case No.6852 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 111 of 2022 U/S 498-A. 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Ambedkar Nagar against which an APPLICATION U/S 482 No.6865 of 2023 is pending before Allahabad High Court, Lucknow.

¶30

(ii) Case No.397 of 2022 U/S 125 Cr. P. C. pending before Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ambedkar Nagar.

¶31

(iii) Case No.918 of 2021 for Restitution of Conjugal Rights pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Sultanpur.

¶32

G) That the Second Party has agreed that she will have no objection if the Hon'ble Court decides the MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No.3825 of 2024 (Mo. Harun @ Tiger Vs State of U. P. & Another) filed against the proceedings passed by the Learned Principal Judge, Family Court Ambedkar Nagar in Criminal Misc. Case No.335 of 2021(Smt. Heena Parveen Vs. Mohd. Faheem) U/S 125 Cr. P. C. in terms of this settlement agreement.

¶33

H) That the Second Party has agreed that she will have no objection if the Hon'ble Court decides the APPLICATION U/S 482 No.6865 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No.111 of 2022 U/S 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Ambedkar Nagar in terms of this settlement agreement.

¶34

I) The parties have agreed that apart from mentioned cases, if any other criminal/civil case(s) is pending between the parties or their family members with regard to the present dispute, both the parties shall get the same disposed off in terms of this Settlement Agreement.

¶35

J) That it is also agreed between the parties that henceforth no case will be instituted by them against each other or any of their respective family members in future in the form of criminal or civil proceedings in respect of present dispute.

¶36

K) That both the parties agree that they shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Settlement in strict sense. The Second Party has agreed that in case she fails to cooperate in the divorce and in disposal of pending cases filed by her against the First Party and his family members, she shall return to the First Party the entire amount received by her from the First Party along with interest @9% p.a. with effect from the date of receipt of the amount from the First Party and till the date of its actual payment to the First Party.

¶37

L) That the First Party has agreed that in case he fails to cooperate in the divorce and in disposal of pending case filed by him against the Second Party the amount received by the Second Party from the First Party shall not be returned by the Second Party to the First Party and the Second Party will be at liberty to reopen all her cases decided by the Hon'ble Court in terms of this Settlement Agreement by moving an appropriate application before competent Court/Forum.

¶38

7. By signing this agreement the parties hereto state that they have no further claims or demands against each other with respect to the matter involved in MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No.3825 of 2024 (Mo. Harun @ Tiger Vs State of U. P. & Another) and all disputes and difference in this regard have been amicably settled by the parties hereto through the process of Conciliation/Mediation."

¶39

Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as also the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435 , according to which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023)/under Article 227 of the Constitution of India could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and

¶40

another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409 , according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlements between the parties the criminal proceedings can be quashed, as also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present petition is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, present application is allowed . Consequently, the entire proceedings in issue, indicated in prayer clause of this petition, quoted above, are hereby quashed qua the petitioner in terms of the settlement.

¶41

Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.

¶42

Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Arun/-

¶43

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mo. Harun @ Tiger v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mo. Harun @ Tiger v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko 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

Shiv Ram Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Chhatra Pal Vs State of U.P.

Batoley @ Mata Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Alias Binu Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mo. Harun @ Tiger vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Sudhakar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another