Allowed

Shanky and Another v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2025A482/14065/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings and charge sheet arising from a matrimonial dispute. A settlement was reached via the Court's Mediation Centre, enabling the parties to live separately. The case cites settled Apex Court precedents allowing quashing upon settlement.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings, the charge sheet dated 30.04.2023, and the order of cognizance and summoning dated 04.09.2023 are quashed.

Shanky and Another vs State of Up and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:18516

¶2

Court No. - 78

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14065 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shanky And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Himanshu Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Himanshu Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Birendra Pratap 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 applicants-Shanky and Shiva Sharma with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the charge sheet dated 30.04.2023, being C.S. No. 01 of 2023 as well as entire proceedings registered in its pursuance as Criminal Case No 24291 of 2023 (CNR No. UPAG040542502023), State of U.P. Versus Krishna Kant and others, under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Agra (arising out of Case Crime No. 20 of 2023 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Agra) including order of cognizance and summoning dated 04.09.2023 passed by court below in aforesaid proceedings, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 1, Agra 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 1.5.2024 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably. The dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature.

¶10

As per the office report dated 6.2.2025, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant no.1 Shanky and applicant no.2 Shiva Sharma are devar of opposite party no.2 and they have been falsely implicated in the

¶12

present matter as they are brothers of husband of opposite party no.2. It is further submitted that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons.

¶13

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 25.9.2024, the parties have entered into an interim settlement dated 04.09.2024 and have amicably settled their dispute and decided to live separately and in this regard they have filed a petition u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court concerned and the same is registered as Case No.2535 of 2024 and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶14

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 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded. The 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 7 (f) of the said mediation report.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the said proposition.

¶16

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.

¶17

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).

¶18

The present application is allowed .

¶19

The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case, Charge Sheet as well as cognizance/summoning order passed in the aforesaid case

¶20

are hereby quashed.

¶21

However, it is provided that the Family Court, Kanpur Nagar shall decide the petition 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act filed between the parties, by fixing early date/expediting the same. The parties shall be at liberty to file certified copy of this order before the Family Court concerned which shall then proceed with the matter by fixing an early date and make an endeavour to conclude the same within 45 days of filing of the certified copy of this order.

¶22

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 7.2.2025 Gaurav Kuls

¶24

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shanky and Another v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanky and Another 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

Sitaram Yadav vs State of U.P.

Krishna Kant vs State of U.P. and Another

Naeem Salmani and 4 Others vs State of Up and Another

Ravi Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pankaj Verma and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishnakant and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another