Susheel Kumar Verma @ Susheel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21334

Court No. - 16

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2811 of 2025

Applicant :- Susheel Kumar Verma @ Susheel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Pratap,Shashank Shekhar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.

¶6

Heard the counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 53187 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 0374 of 2021, under Sections 498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kasimpur, District-Hardoi pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, District-Hardoi as well as the summoning and cognizance order dated 14.10.2024 and the charge-sheet No. 01/2021 dated 2.12.2021.

¶8

It has been stated by counsel for the applicants that the dispute between the parties is a matrimonial dispute and in case, the matter is referred for mediation, the parties may amicably settle their dispute.

¶9

A perusal of the document annexed with the affidavit filed in support of the application indicates that there is some civil dispute between the parties.

¶10

The Apex Court in paragraph no. 19 of the case of Rajesh Sharma & Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in 2017 (AIR) SC 3869 has issued certain directions regarding disputes covered under Section 498-A IPC. Paragraph 19 of the judgment is reproduced below:-

¶11

"19. Thus, after careful consideration of the whole issue, we consider it fit to give following directions :-

¶12

(i) (a) In every district one or more Family Welfare Committees be constituted by the District Legal Services Authorities preferably comprising of three members. The constitution and working of such committees may be reviewed from time to time and at least once in a year by the District and Sessions Judge of the district who is also the Chairman of the District Legal Services Authority.

¶13

(b) The Committees may be constituted out of para legal volunteers/social workers/retired persons/wives of working officers/other citizens who may be found suitable and willing.

¶14

(c) The Committee members will not be called as witnesses.

¶15

(d) Every complaint under Section 498A received by the police or the Magistrate be referred to and looked into by such committee. Such committee may have interaction with the parties personally or by means of telephone or any other mode of communication including electronic communication.

¶16

(e) Report of such committee be given to the Authority by whom the complaint is referred to it latest within one month from the date of receipt of complaint.

¶17

(f) The committee may give its brief report about the factual aspects and its opinion in the matter.

¶18

(g) Till report of the committee is received, no arrest should normally be effected.

¶19

(h) The report may be then considered by the Investigating Officer or the Magistrate on its own merit.

¶20

(i) Members of the committee may be given such basic minimum training as may be considered necessary by the Legal Services Authority from time to time.

¶21

(j) The Members of the committee may be given such honorarium as may be considered viable.

¶22

(k) It will be open to the District and Sessions Judge to utilize the cost fund wherever considered necessary and proper.

¶23

(ii) Complaints under Section 498A and other connected offences may be investigated only by a designated Investigating Officer of the area. Such designations may be made within one month from today. Such designated officer may be required to undergo training for such duration (not less than one week) as may be considered appropriate. The training may be completed within four months from today;

¶24

(iii) In cases where a settlement is reached, it will be open to the District and Sessions Judge or any other senior Judicial Officer nominated by him in the district to dispose of the proceedings including closing of the criminal case if dispute primarily relates to matrimonial discord;

¶25

(iv) If a bail application is filed with at least one clear day?s notice to the Public Prosecutor/complainant, the same may be decided as far as possible on the same day. Recovery of disputed dowry items may not by itself be a ground for denial of bail if maintenance or other rights of wife/minor children can otherwise be protected. Needless to say that in dealing with bail matters, individual roles, prima facie truth of the allegations, requirement of further arrest/ custody and interest of justice must be carefully weighed;

¶26

(v) In respect of persons ordinarily residing out of India impounding of passports or issuance of Red Corner Notice should not be a routine;

¶27

(vi) It will be open to the District Judge or a designated senior judicial officer nominated by the District Judge to club all connected cases between the parties arising out of matrimonial disputes so that a holistic

¶28

view is taken by the Court to whom all such cases are entrusted;

¶29

(vii) Personal appearance of all family members and particularly outstation members may not be required and the trial court ought to grant exemption from personal appearance or permit appearance by video conferencing without adversely affecting progress of the trial; and

¶30

(viii) These directions will not apply to the offences involving tangible physical injuries or death."

¶31

In view of the aforesaid, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before this Court. The court below, i.e., the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, District-Hardoi is directed to refer the parties to the Committee constituted for mediation in District-Lucknow within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

¶32

The Mediation Centre shall submit its report within one month from the date of receipt of the case from the concerned Magistrate. Further proceedings in Case No. 53187 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 0374 of 2021, under Sections 498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kasimpur, District-Hardoi pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, District-Hardoi will depend on the report received by the Mediation Centre of the District and in case the mediation fails, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, District-Hardoi shall proceed with the case in accordance with law.

¶33

Till the report of the Mediation Centre as aforesaid, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Case No. 53187 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 0374 of 2021, under Sections 498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kasimpur, District-Hardoi pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, District-Hardoi.

¶34

With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed of .

¶35

Order Date :- 16.4.2025 Anurag/-

¶36

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Susheel Kumar Verma @ Susheel v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susheel Kumar Verma @ Susheel v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home 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

Aslam Khan @ Mohd. Aslam Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Mrs. Gunjeet Kaur and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abu Talib and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Raj Kumar @ Babban Pasi and Anothers Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jitendra Kumar Alias Jeetu Lodh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Divyanshu Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Anothers