Rambihari Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135623

Court No. - 64

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35072 of 2024

Applicant :- Rambihari Sharma And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Lokesh Kumar Pundir, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rahul Gaur, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

¶8

Photocopy of the Settlement Agreement dated 28.03.2025 entered between the applicant no.1 / husband and the opposite party no.2 / wife has been produced before the Court by learned counsel for the applicants which is taken on record.

¶9

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 06.01.2025 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura 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.

¶10

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants- Rambihari Sharma, Krishna Bihari Sharma and Madhu Sharma, with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the entire proceeding as well as summoning order dated 16.07.2024 in Case No. 188 / 12 of 2017 (Pooja v. Ram Bihari Sharma and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 638 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. act, Police Station Hathras Kotwali, District Hathras, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/ F.T.C.2, Hathras. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application.

¶11

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 21.10.2024 for making an effort between the

¶12

parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶13

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 28.03.2025 the parties have entered into an settlement dated 28.03.2025 in view of Second Interim Settlement dated 07.03.2025 and have amicably settled their dispute 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 dated 28.03.2025 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 7 (च) of the said mediation report.

¶15

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, Hathras as Case No. 128 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.

¶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 applicants.

¶18

The present application is allowed.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 11.8.2025 AS Rathore

¶23

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶24

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

Rambihari Sharma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambihari Sharma and 2 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