Subodh Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 3481 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Subodh Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 15 January, 2025

Author: Dinesh Pathak

Bench: Dinesh Pathak

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:7107
 
Court No. - 74
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8731 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Subodh Kumar
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Dhar Dubey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Bharat Singh,G.A.,Ram Krishna Yadav
 
Connected with 
 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8527 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Smt. Asha Devi And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Dhar Dubey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Bharat Singh,G.A.,Jatin Kumar Mishra,Ram Krishna Yadav
 

 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

2. The applicant of application U/S 482 No. - 8731 of 2023 is husband while the applicants of application U/s 482 No.-8527 of 2023 are the mother-in-law and father-in-law respectively. Since both the captioned applications are arising out of matrimonial discord, they are being decided together with common order.

3. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the entire proceedings arising out of charge Sheet dated 22.04.2022 in Case No. 1057 of 2023 (State vs. Subodh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.89 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, I. P. C. & Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Dataganj, District- Badaun, pending before the court of A.C.J.M., Court No.2, Badaun.

4. It is submitted that instant matter is arising out of matrimonial discord. This Court, vide order dated 15.3.2023, has referred the matter before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre to explore the possibility of conciliation between the parties. For ready reference, the order dated 15.3.2023 is quoted hereinbelow:

"Heard Mr. Dharmendra Dhar Dubey, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned AGA for State.

Perused the record.

Challenging in this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to the chargesheet dated 22.04.2022 submitted in Case Crime No.89 of 2022, under Section 498A, 323 IPC & under Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Dataganj, District Badaun as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.1057 of 2023, State v. Subodh and others, under Section 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Dataganj, District Badaun now pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, District Badaun.

Learned counsel for applicants submits that the dispute between the parties is a matrimonial dispute, which has been dragged into criminal litigation. In case an opportunity is granted to the parties by referring them to mediation, they may get an opportunity to amicably settle their dispute.

Considering the nature of litigation as well as the relationship between the parties, the Court is of the considered opinion that an opportunity be provided to the parties for mediation to enable them to amicably settle their dispute. Accordingly, the matter is referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad.

The applicants are directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 30,000/- by way of demand draft / pay order in the name of Registrar General A/c, Allahabad High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre within a period of ten days from today. After deposit of the aforesaid money, office shall send a notice to the opposite party no.2 to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on the date fixed in the notice. Out of aforesaid amount, a sum of Rs. 25,000/- shall be payable to the opposite party no.2 on her appearance before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre. The balance amount shall be retained by Mediation Centre. The Mediation Centre will submit its report in the matter within three months.

Notice on behalf of opposite party-1 has been accepted by learned A.G.A.

Issue notice to opposite party-2.

All the opposite parties may file their respective counter affidavits on or before the next date fixed in the notice.

Put up this matter on 19.06.2022 as fresh alongwith the report of Mediation Centre.

Since the parties have been referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Allahabad, it is provided that till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant in aforementioned case crime number.

If the amount, as directed above, is not deposited by the applicants within the aforesaid period, the protection granted to the applicants shall automatically come to an end and the office shall immediately list this case as fresh for further orders before the Court."

5. In pursuance of the order dated 15.3.2023, final settlement agreement dated 7.2.2024 took place between the parties, which is quoted hereinbelow:

"ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION CENTRE INTERIM SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

This INTERIM SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT entered into on 07.02.2024. between Subodh Kumar (Applicant-Husband) and Smt. Rinki alias Ursha Devi (O.P. No.2-Wife).

WHEREAS

1) Disputes and differences had arisen between the Parties hereto Application U/s 482 No. 8731 of 2023 as filed before the Hon'ble High Court.

2) The matter was referred to mediation / conciliation vide order dated 15.03.2023 passed by Hon'ble Rajeev Misra, J.

3) The parties agreed that Mr. N.S. Chahar and Ms. Kavita Tomar, Advocates would act as their Conciliators/Mediators, in the Mediation Case No. 3372/2023.

4) Several joint and separate meetings were held during the process of Conciliation/Mediation on 23.08.2023, 13.09.2023, 11.10.2023, 22.11.2023, 13.12.2023 and 10.01.2024 and the parties have with the assistance of Mediators/Conciliators voluntarily arrived at an amicable solution resolving the above-mentioned disputes and differences.

5) The marriage of Subodh Kumar (Applicant -Husband) and Smt. Rinki @ Ursha Devi (O.P. No. 2- Wife) was solemnized on 02.07.2017. Out of aforesaid wedlock, the parties have no issue. The parties started are living separately since December, 2017.

6) The parties hereto confirm and declare that they have voluntarily and of their own free will arrive at this Settlement/Agreement in the presence of the Mediators/Conciliators.

7) The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:-

a) That earlier on 11.10.2023, the parties entered into an interim settlement and decided to live together as husband and wife but they failed to restore their relations, as such, now they have decided to part their ways by filing a divorce petition u/s 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Budaun on or before 25.01.2024 and shall produce certified copy of the divorce petition before the Centre on the next date fixed Le. 07.02.2024.

b) That it has been consented and agreed between the parties that the Husband shall pay one time settlement amount of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh only) to the wife which includes permanent alimony and Stridhan by way of Demand Draft.

c) That today i.e. 10.01.2024, the Husband has produced a demand draft bearing No.012950 dated 06.01.2024 for Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakh only) drawn on Axis Bank Ltd in favour of Rinkee (wife), which is being kept in the Connected file Application U/s 482 No.8527 of 2023 (Mediation No.3371/2023) with the consent of the parties and shall be handed over to the wife at the time of final settlement-agreement.

d) That it has been agreed between the parties that the remaining amount ie. Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakh Only) will be paid by the Husband to the wife by way of Demand Draft at the time of final judgment in the divorce petition before the Family Court, Budaun.

e) That it has also been agreed between the parties that husband shall hand over the house hold items/belongings (as decided between them) of the wife to her outside the court on or before 25.01.2024.

f) That it has been agreed between the parties that all the cases filed by them against each other will be kept in abeyance during this intervening period.

g) That it has been agreed between the parties that they shall appear again before the Centre on 07.02.2024."

6. It is further submitted that both the parties have entered into compromise out of their own volition without any duress and buried the hatchet. There is no grudges between them against each other. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that in the above eventuality of amicable settlement took place between the parties, instant application may be allowed and the entire proceedings may be quashed. To quash the cognizance order as well as criminal proceeding, learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the following judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court:- (i) B.S.Joshi & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Others; (2003) 4 SCC 675. (ii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 667. (iii) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1. (iv) Gyan Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303. (v) Narindra Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.

7. In a recent judgment passed by a Three Judges' Bench of the Apex Court in the Case of Parbatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported in AIR 2017 SC 4843, Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the ratio of all the cases decided earlier with respect to quashing of F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the ground of settlement between the parties and expounded the ten categories in which application under Section 482 could be entertained for quashing the F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise. Para no. 15 of the said judgement summarizing the proposition in this respect is reproduced below :-

"15. (i) Section 482 preserves the inherent power of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court; (ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable. (iii) In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or compliant should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power; (iv) While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised;(i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court; (v) The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated; (vi) In exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot approximately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences; (vii) As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned; (viii) Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute; (ix) In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice; and (x) There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions (viii) and (ix) above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the state have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanor. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance."

8. Learned A.G.A. has no objection, in case, the instant application is decided by this Court on the basis of compromise took place between the parties, which is duly verified by the mediation centre of this Court.

9. Having considered the settlement agreement took place between the parties and with the assistance of the aforesaid guidelines, keeping in view the nature of gravity and severity of the offence, which are more particular in private dispute, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice, the present proceeding should be quashed. In result, dispute between the parties will put to an end, peace will be resorted and relationship between them will be smooth. No useful purpose would be served to keep the present matter pending inasmuch as both the parties have buried the hatchet and as the time passes, it will be difficult to prove the guilt of the accused. The continuation of criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice.

10. In view of the aforesaid pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and in the light of the settlement agreement inked between the parties, both the applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are hereby allowed. The entire criminal proceeding of the aforementioned case is hereby quashed.

11. Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action.

Order Date :- 15.1.2025

vinay