Allowed¶13

Amit Verma @ Mausam and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2025A482/16501/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing on mediation settlement; matrimonial dispute under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act; Case Crime No. 322 of 2023, P.S. New Agra, Agra; Criminal Case No. 2292 of 2024 before CJM Agra; charge sheet No. 286 of 2023 dated 08.10.2023; summoning order dated 03.02.2024; mediation settlement dated 18.10.2024; spouses reunite and withdraw cases; relied on B.S. Joshi, Nikhil Merchant, Manoj Sharma, Gian Singh, Shaifullah, Parbatbhai Ahir; Allahabad High Court; Samit Gopal, J.; 2025:AHC:24198.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; the impugned charge sheet dated 08.10.2023 (Charge sheet No. 286 of 2023), summoning order dated 03.02.2024 and proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2292 of 2024 quashed. ¶13

Amit Verma @ Mausam and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application allowed; the impugned charge sheet dated 08.10.2023 (Charge sheet No. 286 of 2023), summoning order dated 03.02.2024 and proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2292 of 2024 quashed.

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned charge sheet dated 08.10.2023, cognizance/summoning order dated 03.02.2024 and proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2292 of 2024 can be quashed on the ground of the settlement arrived at between the parties through the Mediation Centre of the Court.

¶7

Court's answer

In pursuance of the referral order, mediation proceedings ended in a settlement dated 18.10.2024 between the parties; the Mediation succeeded, the parties (applicant no. 1 husband and opposite party no. 2 wife) decided to reunite and live together as husband and wife, and agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

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

¶9

Key takeaways

Since the parties have settled their grievances and the Apex Court has held that cases in which parties have settled their grievances can be quashed, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings/summoning order/charge sheet as prayed for by the applicants.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Samit Gopal, J.; order dated 19.2.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:24198) allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by Amit Verma @ Mausam and three others praying to quash charge sheet No. 286 of 2023 dated 08.10.2023, the cognizance/summoning order dated 03.02.2024 of the C.J.M., Agra, and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2292 of 2024 (State vs. Amit and others) under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, arising out of Case Crime No. 322 of 2023, P.S. New Agra, District Agra. Referred to the Court's Mediation Centre on 11.06.2024, the matter ended in a settlement dated 18.10.2024 whereby the husband-applicant and wife-opposite party agreed to reunite and withdraw pending cases. Relying on B.S. Joshi, Nikhil Merchant, Manoj Sharma, Gian Singh, Shaifullah and Parbatbhai Ahir, the Court found the matter fit for quashing on the ground of settlement and quashed the charge sheet, summoning order and proceedings.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24198

¶2

Court No. - 78

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16501 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Amit Verma @ Mausam And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- A.K. Mishra,Sati Shanker Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri S.S. Tripathi, 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, Amit Verma @ Mausam, Pawan Verma, Smt. Mithilesh Verma and Rakesh Verma with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 08.10.2023 (Charge sheet No. 286 of 2023), Cognizance / Summoning order dated 03.02.2024 passed by C.J.M. Agra as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2292 of 2024 (State vs. Amit and others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, arising out of Case Crime No. 322 of 2023, Police Station New Agra, District Agra, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.

¶9

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 11.06.2024 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶10

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 18.10.2024 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 and the applicant no. 1 (husband) and the opposite party no. 2 (wife) have decided to reunite and live together as husband and wife, para-7(ka) and therefore the impugned proceedings/summoning order/charge sheet be quashed on the ground of settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶13

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 18.10.2024 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded and they have decided to to reunite and live together as husband and wife, para6(b). 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 6(h) of the said mediation report.

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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/charge sheet as prayed for by the applicants.

¶17

The present application is allowed .

¶18

The impugned charge sheet, summoning order dated 03.02.2024 and proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.

¶19

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Manoj

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit Verma @ Mausam and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Verma @ Mausam and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases