Mohit Kumar and Another Vs State of Up and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135748

Court No. - 64

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30842 of 2024

Applicant :- Mohit Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

with

¶6

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30854 of 2024

¶7

Applicant :- Aradhana And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶8

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶9

List revised.

¶10

Heard Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State in both the matters and perused the records.

¶11

Vide order dated 21.10.2024 notice was issued to the opposite party no.2. As per the office report dated 11.08.2025 a report regarding service of notice has been received. The report dated 21.02.2025 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor is on record which states that notice has been served on the opposite party no.2 personally. Despite service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2.

¶12

The Application U/S 482 No. 30842 of 2024 has been filed by the applicantsMohit Kumar and Raj Bala, with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the entire proceeding as well as charge-sheet dated 11.01.2022 & 28.03.2022 & cognizance order dated 10.08.2023 in Case No.21047 of 2023 (State vs. Mohit Kumar and Others), in Case Crime No.542 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Seohara, District- Bijnor, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Bijnor. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case.

¶13

The Application U/S 482 No. 30854 of 2024 has been filed by the applicantsAradhana, Sadhna Rani and Upasna, with the prayer to allow the present

¶14

application and quash the entire proceeding as well as charge-sheet dated 11.01.2022 & 28.03.2022 & cognizance order dated 10.08.2023 in Case No.21047 of 2023 (State vs. Mohit Kumar and Others), in Case Crime No.542 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Seohara, DistrictBijnor, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Bijnor. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case.

¶15

The matters were referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide orders dated 21.10.2024 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶16

As per reports of Mediation Centre dated 08.04.2025 the parties have entered into an settlement dated 08.04.2025 in view of Interim Settlement dated 25.03.2025 and have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶17

As per the office report dated 11.08.2025 reports from the Mediation Centre of this Court are on record.

¶18

From perusal of the reports 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 08.04.2025 between the parties subject to the terms and conditions mentioned therein and the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising out in the present matter. The parties have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in para 8 (ङ) of the said mediation report.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicants states that a case under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act is pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bijnor as Case No. 291 of 2025. Learned counsel assures that the applicants shall abide by all the terms and conditions of settlement agreement arrived at between the parties before the mediation centre of this Court and shall fully co-operate with expeditious disposal of the said case pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court concerned. He prays that a direction for expeditious disposal of the same be given.

¶20

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

¶21

can be quashed.

¶22

From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present cases are good cases for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicants.

¶23

The present applications are allowed .

¶24

The proceedings of the present cases as well as the summoning order/charge sheet are hereby quashed.

¶25

However the Principal Judge, Family Court concerned is directed to expedite the hearing of the said case and decide the same within 45 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶26

Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court within two weeks from today.

¶27

Order Date :- 11.8.2025 AS Rathore

¶28

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohit Kumar and Another v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Kumar and Another v. State of Up 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