Allowed

Rohit Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2025A482/15280/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 CrPC to quash summoning order in a complaint case under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC. Parties settled their dispute through the Court's Mediation Centre, agreeing to withdraw cases between them. Relying on settled Supreme Court law on quashing upon settlement, the court allowed the application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Rohit Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:25110

¶2

Court No. - 78

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15280 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rohit Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Giri Ram Rawat,Indra Deo Mishra,Shri Ram (Rawat),Sofia Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Ms. Sofia Khan, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the records.

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants Rohit Kumar and Smt. Neetu with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including summoning order dated 17.09.2021 passed by Judicial Magistrate 3rd, Farrukhabad in Complaint Case No. 2997 of 2021 (Santoshi vs. Rohit and another), under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Farrukhabad, District Farrukhabad.

¶9

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 16.05.2024 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶10

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 27.10.2024, the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶11

As per the office report dated 18.02.2025, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record which states that mediation between the parties is successful.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicants argued that parties have settled the dispute amicably before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. The applicant no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 have decided that the daughter of applicant no. 1 namely, Disha aged about 11 years will reside with applicant no. 1 and applicant no. 2, who are her father and step mother, therefore the impugned proceedings/summoning order be quashed on the ground of

¶13

settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶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 dated 27.10.2024 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded and they have decided that the daughter of applicant no. 1 namely, Disha aged about 11 years will reside with applicant no. 1 and applicant no. 2, who are her father and step mother. 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(cha) of the said mediation report.

¶15

Learned State counsel could not dispute the factum of compromise between the parties which is on record.

¶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/summoning order as prayed for by the applicants.

¶18