Nitish Sharma And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 4822 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Nitish Sharma And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 10 February, 2025

Author: Manju Rani Chauhan

Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19323
 
Court No. - 52
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44615 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Nitish Sharma And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Saiful Islam Siddiqui,Tahira Kazmi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
 

1. Supplementary affidavit on behalf of the applicants filed today in the Court, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

2. Heard Mr. Saiful Islam Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Pradeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as Mr. Deepak Kapoor, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

3. This application u/s 482 has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.681/IX/2022 (State Vs. Nitesh Sharma and another), initiated on the basis of charge-sheet filed in Case Crime No. 186 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Mathura, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Fast Track (Crime against Women)/ Judicial Magistrate, Mathura as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 07.12.2022, on the basis of settlement agreement.

4. On 21.01.2025, the following order was passed in the matter:-

"Supplementary affidavit on behalf of the applicants filed today in the Court, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the First Appeal No. 166 of 2024 filed by applicant no.1, a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.09.2024 has referred the matte to the Mediation Centre of this Court, wherein an interim settlement agreement has been arrived between the parties on 28.11.2024. The interim settlement agreement dated 28.11.2024 is annexed as Annexure No.15 to the application. He further submits that next date fixed before the Mediation Centre of this Court is 06.02.2024.

Put up this case, as fresh, on 10.02.2025.

Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Case No.681/IX/2022 (State Vs. Nitesh Sharma and another), arising out of Case Crime No.186 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Mathura, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Fast Tract Court (Crime against Women)/ Judicial Magistrate, Mathura."

5. In compliance of the aforesaid order the parties have appeared before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and have arrived at a settlement agreement dated 06.02.2025. Certified copy o the settlement agreement dated 06.02.2025 is annexed as Annexure No.SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed today. According to which the applicant no. 1 and opposite party no.2 have decided to live separately on the following terms and conditions:-

"8) In view of the Interim Settlements Agreements dated 28.11.2024 & 16.01.2025, the following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:-

a) That the parties agreed to live separately and mutually settled to dissolve their marriage.

b) That it was agreed between the parties that Nitish Sharma (appellant) shall pay an amount of Rs.9,50,000/- (Rs. Nine Lakh Fifty Thousand only) to Smt. Priyanka Sharma (respondent) which includes permanent alimony Stridhan and maintenance of Smt. Priyanka Sharma (respondent) by way o demand drafts.

c) That on 28.11.2024, the appellant has produced two demand drafts bearing nos. 124197 & 124198 dated 11.11.2024 & 12.11.2024 for Rs.5,00,000/(Rs. Five Lakh only) & Rs. 4,50,000/- (Four Lakh Fifty Thousand only respectively drawn on Bank of Baroda in favour of Priyanka Sharm (respondent), where were kept on record. Out of the aforesaid demand drafts, a demand draft bearing no. 124197 dated 11.11.2024 fo Rs.5,00,000/- was handed over to Smt. Priyanka Sharma (respondent) c 16.01.2025 and the respondent has acknowledged the receipt of the same.

d) That today i.e., 06.02.2025, the appellant has handed over another demar draft bearing no.124198 dated 12.11.2024 for Rs. 4,50,000/- (Rs. Fo Lakh Fifty Thousand only) drawn on Bank of Baroda which was kept c record, to Smt. Priyanka Sharma (respor dent) and the respondent has acknowledged the receipt of the same.

e) That as agreed between the parties in para 8 (d) of the interim settlement agreement dated 28.11.2024, the respondent has withdrawn the following cases and the certified copies of the same shll be produced before the Hon'ble High Court at the time of hearing.

1. M.T. Petition No. 177 of 2021 (Priyanka Sharma vs. Nitish Kumar Sharma), under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

II. CT Case No. 2334 of 2020 (Priyanka Sharma vs. Nitish Kumar Sharma), under Section 12 D.V. Act, Prahladpur.

f) That the appellant has also filed an application on 21.12.2024 in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 2218/2019 (Nitish Sharma vs. Smt. Priyanka Sharma), filed under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act and the certified copy of the same shall be produced by the appellant before the Hon'ble High Court at the time of hearing.

g) That it has also been agreed between the parties that the respondent shall have no objection if the Hon'ble Court pleases to allow the Application U/S 482 No. 44615 of 2024 (Nitish Sharma and another vs. State of U.P. and another) on the basis of this settlement agreement between the parties today i.e., 06.02.2025.

h) That the present settlement may be made a part of the judgment and decree in the present case.

i) That it has also been agreed between the parties that apart from the above mentioned cases, all civil and criminal cases (if any) filed by them against each other regarding present matrimonial dispute shall be withdrawn by the parties concerned by taking appropriate steps before the Court/authority concerned.

j) That the parties will not file any fresh case against each other in respect of present matrimonial dispute."

6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the settlement agreement has arrived at between the parties and one of the terms and conditions is to withdrawal of the cases filed against each other, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.

7. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State could not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants.

8. This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:

(i). B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,

(ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,

(iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,

(iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,

(v). Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,

9. In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936 in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

11. Accordingly, the proceedings of Case No.681/IX/2022 (State Vs. Nitesh Sharma and another), initiated on the basis of charge-sheet filed in Case Crime No. 186 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Mathura as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 07.12.2022, on the basis of settlement agreement are hereby quashed.

12. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Order Date :- 10.2.2025

Abhishek Singh