Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Ishtiyaq vs State Of U.P. And Anr. on 8 May, 2024
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:35809
Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 459 of 2018
Revisionist :- Mohd. Ishtiyaq
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Revisionist :- Adarsh Kumar Maurya,Ameenuddin,Nripendra Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Abhishek Srivastava,Dheeraj Srivastava,Krishna Kumar Verma
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
1. Heard Sri Nripendra Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and ShriKrishna Kumar Verma, learned counsel for respondent no.2.
2. This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 20.01.2018 passed in Criminal Appeal No.95 of 2017 by the District Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri affirming the judgment and order dated 27.11.2017 passed in Criminal Case No.868 of 2017 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri whereby the application filed by respondent No.2 under Sections 18, 20 & 21 of the Protection of Women from the Domestic Violence Act has been allowed.
3. It is submitted by the parties that vide order dated 29.01.2024 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the matter was referred for mediation before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and parties have appeared before mediation centre and settle the dispute between them regarding all the matters filed against each other. The settlement agreement has been signed before the mediation centre, mediation has been successful, the report of the mediation is on record.
4. Perused the record.
5. Perusal of the record shows that all the cases filed by both the parties have been settled and the dispute between the parties have been agreed to be disposed of in terms of the settlement agreement. The settlement agreement arrived between the parties is extracted below:-
"6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:
A) That both the parties state that they are living separately since 18.09.2007 and the parties have e divorced each other as per their personal laws. Further it is admitted between the parties that the Second Party has also remarried. As for as the maintenance is concerned against which the CRIMINAL REVISION No. 459 of 2018 (Mohd. Ishtiyaq Vs. State of U.P. & Another) is pending before the Hon'ble Court, the parties agreed that a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs Fifty Thousand only) be paid to the Second Party by the First Party towards one time full and final settlement of all her claims including the claim for maintenance as well as permanent alimony.
B) That out of aforesaid amount of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs Fifty Thousand only), a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (One Lac only) has already been paid to the Second Party by the First Party through a Demand Draft No. 572359 drawn on IDFC First Bank, Lakhimpur Kheri. The Second Party acknowledges receipt of the said payment.
C) That the balance amount Rs. 1,50,000/- (One Lac Fifty Thousand only) is also paid by the First Party to the Second Party today 1.e. 08.04.2024 vide two Demand Drafts bearing No.572364 dated 18.01.2024 amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lac only) drawn on IDFC First Bank, Lakhimpur Kheri and bearing No. 246844 dated 27.03.2024 amounting to Rs. 50,000/- (Fifty Thousand only drawn on State Bank of India. The Second Party acknowledges receipt of the said Demand Drafts.
D) That now parties agreed that noting further remains to be paid by either party to each other.
E) That the parties have agreed to withdraw/not pursue the cases filed against each other. The details of the cases are mentioned hereunder:
Cases filed by the Second Party:
(i) Case No. 2173 of 2022 U/S 498A IPC and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, P. S. -Isa Nagar, Lakhimpur Kheri pending in the Court of VII ACJM, Kheri.
(ii) Case No. 3592 of 2020 U/S 12 of D. V. Act P. S. Isa Nagar, Lakhimpur Kheri pending in the Court of J. M. Lakhimpur Kheri.
Case filed by the First Party:
(iii) Complaint Case No. 983 of 2021 (Ishtiak Vs. Sama Kahtoon) pending in the A.J.M/ Court No. 7, Lakhimpur Kheri
F) That the parties agree that they shall have no objection if the Hon'ble Court decides the CRIMINAL REVISION No. 459 of 2018 (Mohd. Ishtiyaq Vs. State of U.P. & Another) in terms of this Settlement Agreement.
G) The parties have agreed that apart from mentioned case, if any other civil or criminal case(s) is pending between the parties or their family members with regard to the present dispute, both the parties shall get the same disposed off in terms of this Settlement Agreement.
H) That it is also agreed between the parties that henceforth no case will be instituted by them against each other or any of their respective family members in future in the form of criminal or civil proceedings in respect of present dispute.
I) That both the parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Settlement Agreement in strict sense. In case of any default, the party committing default shall be liable for playing fraud with the Court, hence for contempt of the Court.
7. By signing this Agreement the Parties hereto state that they have no claims or demands against each other with respect to CRIMINAL REVISION No. 459 of 2018 (Mohd. Ishtiyaq Vs. State of U.P. & Another) and all disputes and differences in this regard and arising out of their matrimonial relationship have been amicably settled by the Parties hereto through the process of Conciliation/Mediation.
In WITNESS WHEREOF the First Party and Second Party have signed this agreement with free will without any pressure, force and coercion with the help of the Mediators."
6. Learned counsel for the parties submits that in view of the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus State of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466, the proceedings pending before learned trial court are liable to be quashed.
7. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise and from perusal of the record it appears that the compromise has been verified before the mediation centre as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases (supra), the present petition is allowed and the criminal proceedings (supra) are hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 8.5.2024
Saurabh Yadav/-
