Allowed

Abhinav Sinha v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Apr 2025A482/5496/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. alleging domestic violence and cheque bounce. Post-matrimonial dispute, parties reached a mediated settlement. The High Court, citing settled law on quashing initiated criminal proceedings in matrimonial strife, allowed the application and quashed the proceedings against the applicant due to bleak conviction prospects

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; entire criminal proceedings under CIMC No. 125030 of 2023 quashed as far as it relates to the applicant.

Abhinav Sinha Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20118

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5496 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Abhinav Sinha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Singh,Abhay Nath Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhanu Pratap Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record.

¶7

The present application has been filed by the applicant for the following main relief(s):-

¶8

"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire criminal of proceeding of Criminal Misc. Case No. 125030 of 2023; State Vs. Abhinav Sinha and others, arising out of Charge Sheet No. 01 of 2022 dated 19.07.2023 in pursuance of Case Crime No./ First Information Report No. 172 of 2022, Under Section 498A, 420, 506, 406, 504 I.P.C., relating to Police Station - Mahila Thana, Commissionerate and District Lucknow, as well as summoning order dated 23.11.2023 passed by Learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC Crime Against Woman, Lucknow (Contained as Annexure No. 1 & 2), in the interest of justice."

¶9

It appears that on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court vide its order dated 19.11.2024 referred the matter to Mediation Centre of this Court so as to carve out possibility of amicable settlement of dispute between the parties. The same is quoted hereinbelow:-

¶10

"1. On 19.6.2024, following order was passed:-

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the private respondent on 25.01.2022 and thereafter she was reluctant to live with the parents of the applicant as the applicant is only son of his parents. When the wife of the applicant refused to take care of his parents then applicant requested not to do this, then on the basis of incorrect facts FIR in question was lodged. In the FIR allegation is also made that applicant is impotent. Learned counsel for the applicant also relied on the medico legal report (Annexure - 6) and submitted sufficient evidences were provided to the Investigating Officer but he failed to consider as he violated the provisions of para 107 of U.P. Police Regulations and all the family members of the applicant have been dragged in the criminal prosecution and charge sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer and he also submitted that applicant is also willing to settle the dispute in the mediation before this Court.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicant and submitted that after detailed investigation charge sheet has been filed but he does not raise any objection on the point of mediation.

¶14

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the petition as well as FIR and other relevant documents including Annexure - 6 as there is a matrimonial dispute between the applicant and private respondent, therefore, possibility of settlement cannot be ruled out.

¶15

Issue notice to the private respondent.

¶16

List this case on 29.7.2024. Till the next date of listing impugned proceedings of Criminal Misc Case No.125030 of 2023 [State vs. Abhinav Sinha and Others] shall remain stayed. Petitioner is directed to deposit Rs.25,000/- before the Senior Registrar of this Court within two weeks. In case the aforesaid amount is not deposited then the protection will not be available to the applicant.

¶17

2. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection, in case, the matter is sent to the mediation center of this Court.

¶18

3. List on 27.11.2024 at 11:30 A.M. before Mediation Center of this Court.

¶19

4. Parties are directed to appear before the mediation center of this Court.

¶20

5. List before this Court on 24.2.2025 alongwith mediation report.

¶21

6. Interim order, granted earlier, shall continue till the next date of listing.

¶22

7. Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to release the amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited by the applicant in favour of the private respondent. "

¶23

It also appears that in compliance of order of this Court dated 19.11.2024, a SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT has entered into between applicant/husband and opposite party No. 2/wife on 3.03.2025.

¶24

The Mediation and Conciliation Centre has sent its report along with the settlement agreement, which is on the record.

¶25

Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435, according to which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, as also the observations made by Apex

¶26

Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409 , according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlements between the parties in the mediation proceedings as mentioned above, the criminal proceedings can be quashed, as also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and hence no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.

¶27

In view of above, the present application is allowed . Consequently, the entire proceeding, quoted above, are hereby quashed as far as it is related to the applicant.

¶28

Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.

¶29

Order Date :- 9.4.2025 AKK

¶30

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

Abhinav Sinha v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhinav Sinha v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shekhar Sandal @ Shekhar Chandra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and Another

Mohd. Salman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sarvesh Singh @ Ghasi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Nakul Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Juvenile X (Now Major ) in Pocso Case No 571 of 2021 Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Ramji Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another