Nishant Singh and 7 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Vikram Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, who has filed his Vakalatnama today in Court, which is taken on record and Ms. Harshita Rani, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶11

The instant application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed seeking quashing for the entire proceeding of Case No. 1226 of 2023 as well as Charge-sheet dated 5.5.2023 and summoning order dated 7.7.2023 (State vs. Nishant and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 034 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Kaushambi, DistrictTrons Hindon (Commissionerate Ghaziabad), pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.

¶12

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 states that the Opposite Party No. 2 was also present in person in Court on 11.9.2025 and this Court passed the following order:-

¶13

"1. Heard Sri Shantanu Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ajay Kr. Pal, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Om Prakash Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶14

2. The instant application has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of case No. 1226 of 2023 arising out of case crime No. 34 of 2023, under Section 498A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kaushambi, District Ghaziabad as well as charge sheet dated 5.5.2023 and summoning order dated 7.7.2023.

¶15

3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that parties have settled their dispute amicably before the Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Court, Delhi and in pursuance of that settlement a divorce decree dated 30.7.2024 has also been passed by the Family Court. It is further submitted that as per the agreement the applicants were required to pay Rs. 5 Lakh to opposite party No.2, but they could pay only Rs. 3.5 Lakh and the remaining amount that was to be paid at the time of quashing of the

¶16

NA528 No. 32128 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

F.I.R. could not be paid. It is further submitted that the applicants are ready to pay the remaining amount of Rs.1.5 Lakh.

¶19

4. In view of the aforesaid submission, issue notice to opposite party No.2

¶20

5. Put up on 13.10.2025 as fresh.

¶21

6. On that date the applicants will bring a draft of Rs.1.5 Lakh payable to opposite party No.2 before this Court.

¶22

7. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. "

¶23

As per the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have settled their dispute amicably before the Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Court, Delhi and in pursuance of that settlement a divorce decree dated 30.7.2024 has also been passed by the Family Court. It is further submitted that as per the agreement the applicants were required to pay Rs. 5 Lakh to opposite party No.2, but they could pay only Rs. 3.5 Lakh and the remaining amount that was to be paid at the time of quashing of the F.I.R. could not be paid. It is further submitted that the applicants are ready to pay the remaining amount of Rs.1.5 Lakh.

¶24

Ms. Yogita Singh, Opposite Party No. 2, who is present in Court alongwith her counsel, had received demand Draft No. 8187 amounting to Rs. 1.5 lakh dated 9.9.2025 and the same has been duly acknowledged by her. As per the aforesaid settlement, marriage between the applicant and the Opposite Party No. 2 has already been dissolved.

¶25

Learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 jointly pray for quashing of the entire proceedings of the instant case in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶26

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, learned A.G.A. has not opposed the prayer of the applicants for quashing the entire proceedings of the instant case.

¶27

Having heard the submissions so made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the record of the case. From the record of the case, it is apparent that it was a matrimonial dispute due to which the opposite party no.2 has filed an application under Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C and 3/4 DP Act. Thereafter, the matter was investigated and charge-sheet was filed. Vide order dated 05.05.2023, the applicants herein were summoned for the aforesaid offences by the Chief Judicial Ghaziabad. However, subsequent thereto, the parties have settled their disputes amicably on 23.07.2024.

¶28

Since it was a matrimonial dispute between the parties, which has been amicably

¶29

NA528 No. 32128 of 2025

¶30

3

¶31

settled and the compromise executed has been verified by the trial court, therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the criminal proceeding pending against the applicants herein. Thus, in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Another : (2012) 10 SCC 303; Prabatbhai Aahir Alias Prabatbhai Bhimsinghbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and Another : (2017) 9 SCC 641; Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab : (2014) 6 SCC 466 and B.S.Joshi and Other vs. State of Haryana and Another : (2003) 4 SCC 67, the instant application is allowed and the entire proceedings entire proceeding of Case No. 1226 of 2023 as well as Chargesheet dated 5.5.2023 and summoning order dated 7.7.2023 (State vs. Nishant and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 034 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Kaushambi, District- Trons Hindon (Commissionerate Ghaziabad), pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad, are hereby quashed.

¶32

October 13, 2025 n.u.

¶33

(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)

¶34

Digitally signed by :- NASEEM UDDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nishant Singh and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nishant Singh and 7 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

Shraddha vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Smt Munni Devi and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Chandra vs State of U.P. and Another

Shan Mohammad and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Apoorv Srivastava and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Arshad and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others