Saurabh Bansal vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 1618 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Saurabh Bansal vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 July, 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:105258
 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
******* 
 
(Sl No.124) 
 
Court No. - 78
 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14118 of 2016
 
Applicant :- Saurabh Bansal
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Brij Bhushan Upadhyay,G.A.,Rahul Pandey,Rang Nath Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
 

1. Joint affidavit filed today in Court by the applicant and opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Vishal Tandon, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rang Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing the charge sheet no.14/2016 dated 02.02.2016 and the summoning order dated 11.03.2016 passed in Criminal Case No.312 of 2016, (State vs. Saurabh Bansal), under sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, passed by Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant no.1 and the opposite party no. 2 were the husband and wife. There was matrimonial disputes between the parties, due to which opposite party no.2 has lodged instant criminal case against the applicant. During the pendency of the instant application the parties have arrived at settlement and a compromise was entered into between the parties on 20.05.2025, which has been annexed as Annexure SA-1 to the joint affidavit filed today in Court.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that during the pendency of the instant application, the parties have settled their disputes amicably as it is a matrimonial dispute between the applicant and the opposite party no. 2. The said compromise is also annexed alongwith a joint affidavit filed today in Court. A copy of the compromise has been placed on record by the parties before this Court in First Appeal No. 526 of 2019, Monika Bansal vs. Saurabh Bansal and an amount of Rs. 25 lacs as a part payment through Demand Draft No.504885 dated 20.05.2025 issued by the ICICI Bank in favour of the opposite party no. 2, has also been handed over by the applicant before the Court, which has been kept on record of the original record of First Appeal, to be paid to the opposite party no. 2, subject to quashing of the instant proceedings.

6. The Division Bench of this Court has passed the following order in First Appeal No. 526 of 2019 on 28.05.2005:

"Mr. Rang Nath Pandey, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant, who was wife in the marriage dissolved on judgment dated 17th May, 2019 made by the Family Court. He submits, his client being aggrieved had preferred the appeal.

Mr. Vishal Tandon, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent and submits, there has been agreement between the parties. They have decided that Rs. 75 lacs is to be paid as permanent alimony. He hands up demand draft no.504885 dated 20th May, 2025 issued by ICICI Bank in favour of appellant for Rs.25 lacs. He submits, there is a criminal case pending under, inter alia, section 498-A in Indian Penal Code, 1860. His client has filed for quashing. On the criminal case quashed/ dropped, his client will pay the balance.

Learned advocates appearing for the parties submit, their respective clients are present in the Court.

We will hold the instrument having validity of three months commencing 20th May, 2025 and keep it on record, attached with the order sheet. Parties have liberty to produce website copy of our order before the criminal Court and/ or the criminal revisional Court, to obtain dropping/ quashing of the case bearing Criminal Misc. Appeal (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.) no.l4118 of 2016 (Saurabh Bansal vs. State of U.P. and Another).

List on 7th July, 2025 marked at 02.00 PM."

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has also handed over three cheques amounting Rs. 25,00,000/-, Rs. 12,50,000/-, Rs. 12,50,000/- bearing Cheque Nos. 001599, 001598 and 001597, respectively all dated 21.05.2025, drawn on ICICI Bank to the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 in the Court today.

8. In view of the aforesaid fact that the dispute between the parties is a matrimonial dispute and the parties have settled their disputes amicably by compromise and the a copy of compromise has been placed on record in First Appeal No.526 of 2019, therefore, both the parties seek quashing of the entire proceedings of the instant case.

9. In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that it was a matrimonial dispute and parties have settled their dispute amicably and have entered into compromise and decree of divorce has been granted vide order dated 17.05.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Agra and also considering the fact the post amount for settlement has already been paid through DD deposited in the first appeal and remaining amount as per agreement has been paid to the counsel for opposite party no. 2 through cheques, handed over today in Court, therefore, no purpose would be served in keeping the entire proceeding pending against the applicant.

10. In view of the compromise between the parties, learned A.G.A. also does not oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants as well as the opposite party no.2.

11. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case since, the instant case is arising out matrimonial dispute between the parties and all the disputes have been settled amicably out of the court during the pendency of the instant application, therefore, the instant application is allowed in terms of the compromise.

12. In view of the above, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.312 of 2016, (State vs. Saurabh Bansal), under sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, passed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar arising out of Case Crime No. 131 of 2015 and Charge-sheet No. 14 of 2016 are hereby quashed in the light of the judgements 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.

13. In pursuance of the order dated 09.05.2016, when the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court, the applicant has already paid Rs.30,000/- and by the said order it was directed that 90% of the said amount shall be paid to the opposite party no. 2 on her appearance before the Mediation Centre. Since, the opposite party no.2 failed to appear before Mediation Centre, therefore, the amount so deposited by the applicants before the Mediation Centre, shall be refunded to the applicants in pursuance of order of this Court.

Order Date :- 4.7.2025

Monika

(Anish Kumar Gupta, J.)