Vishal Tripathi And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 942 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Vishal Tripathi And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 14 May, 2025

Author: Alok Mathur

Bench: Alok Mathur

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28530
 
Court No. - 12
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7686 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Vishal Tripathi And 5 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- O.P. Tiwari,Ashish Shukla,Jainendra Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kajal Soni,Rajesh Kumar,Reeta Singh,Vinod Tiwari
 

 
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Ashish Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and Smt. Reeta Singh, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2.

2. By means of present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have prayed for quashing the summoning order dated 16.10.2023, passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/FTC (Crime Against Women), Unnao in Case No. 395 of 2024 - State Vs. Vishal Tripathi, arising out of Case Crime No. 541 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 342, 354 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Unnao as well as entire proceedings of the aforesaid case.

3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that this Court by means of order dated 31.08.2024, directed the parties to appear before Mediation and Conciliation Center of this Court to participate in the mediation process. In compliance of aforesaid order, the parties appeared before the before the Mediation Center of this Court and after certain deliberations the parties have arrived at a settlement agreement and a report dated 19.12.2024, to this effect has been submitted by the Mediation Center for perusal of this Court. Therefore, it is prayed that the proceedings of aforesaid criminal case may be quashed in view of the settlement agreement dated 19.12.2024.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008) 16 SCC 1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand, (2014) 9 SCC 653 and has submitted that the applicants as well as opposite party no. 2 have settled the dispute and as such opposite party no. 2 does not want to press the present case against the applicants.

5. Learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 and learned Additional Government Advocate have stated that they have no objection in case the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed in the light of the aforesaid settlement agreement.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that the parties have entered into settlement agreement dated 19.12.2024, and have settled their dispute amicably. The terms of settlement as detailed in the settlement agreement dated 19.12.2024, are reproduced herein below :-

"6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the parties thereto :-

A. That both the parties namely Sri Vishal Tripathi (husband - First Party) and Smt. Smiriti Tripathi (wife - Second Party) have mutually agreed to live separately and dissolve their marriage with mutual consent. For the purpose of dissolution of their marriage the parties have filed a joint petition for divorce bearing R.S. No. 1685 of 2024 U/S 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before Family /Court, Unnao. Both the parties have agreed to appear before the concerned Family Court on the date(s) fixed and would make their earnest efforts to obtain a decree of divorce in terms of this settlement agreement at the earliest.

B. That the First Party/husband has agreed to pay to the Second Party/wife and the Second Party has agreed to receive a total sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs only) towards one time full and final settlement of all the claims against the First Party including temporary/permanent alimony.

C. That both the parties agree that the aforementioned amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs only) would be paid by the First Party/husband to the Second Party/wife on the date of entering into settlement agreement before Mediation and Conciliation Center, Allahabad High Court, Lucknow. Accordingly, the First Party has handed over a Demand Draft No. 823176 dated 18.12.2024 amounting to Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs only) dated 18.12.2024 in the name of Smiriti Awasthi drawn on Union Bank of India towards aforementioned one time full and final settlement.

D. That the First Party has returned the articles/gifts of the Second Party given at the time of their marriage.

E. That the Second Party has agreed that she shall not have any objection if the APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 7686 of 2024 (Vishal Tripathi & Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another) is allowed and the proceedings of Case No. 395 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 541 of 2022 U/Ss 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 342, 354 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. - Lotwali, District - Unnao pending before the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) FTC (Crime Against Women) Unnao are quashed in terms of this settlement agreement.

F. That the parties have agreed to withdraw/not press/not to pursue the cases filed against each other. The details of the cases are mentioned hereunder:

(i) Case No. 395 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 541 of 2022 U/Ss 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 342, 354 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. - Lotwali, District - Unnao pending before the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) FTC (Crime Against Women) Unnao.

(ii) Case No. 114 of 2022 U/S 125 of Cr.P.C. filed before Family Court, Unnao.

(iii) Complaint Case No. 2184 of 2022 U/S 323, 504, 506, 452 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Sadar, District - Unnao pending before the Court of A.C.J.M.-Ist, Unnao.

G. That the parties have agreed that in addition to the abovementioned cases, if any other case is pending between the parties and/or any of their family members, it shall also be disposed off in terms of this settlement agreement and both the parties agree to co-operate to end all the litigation between the parties and their family members.

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 any dispute arising out of their marriage or any matter incidental thereto.

I. That both the parties have agreed that they shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Settlement in strict sense. The Second Party has agreed that in case she fails to cooperate in the divorce proceedings and in disposal of pending cases filed by her against the First Party and his family members, she will return to the First Party the entire amount received by her from the First Party along with interest @ 9% p.s. with effect from the date of receipt of the amount/installment from the First Party and till the date of its actual payment to the First Party.

J. That the First Party has agreed in case he fails to attend and cooperate in the divorce case, the amount received by the Second Party from the First Party shall not be returned by the Second Party to the First Party and Second Party will be at liberty to reopen all her cases decided by the Hon'ble Court in terms of this Settlement Agreement by moving an appropriate application before competent Court/Forum."

8. In this regard, the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State (supra), Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (supra) and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (supra), which have been relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicants finds force that this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the proceedings as the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties.

9. In the light of the fact that the settlement has arrived at between the applicants and the private respondent and does not effect the public at large, and would only amount to private dispute between the parties, no useful purpose will be served by allowing the applicants to be prosecuted in the said trial, therefore thesummoning order dated 16.10.2023 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 395 of 2024 - State Vs. Vishal Tripathi, arising out of Case Crime No. 541 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 342, 354 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Unnao, are hereby quashed, in the light of terms of settlement agreement dated 19.12.2024.

10. Accordingly this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

Order Date :- 14.5.2025

A. Verma

(Alok Mathur, J.)