Allahabad High Court
Amit And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 September, 2025
Author: Dinesh Pathak
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:157025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24574 of 2021
Amit And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Virendra Kumar Jaiswal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 73
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State. None appeared for the O.P. No.2.
2. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside the charge sheet dated 24.12.2018 relating to Case Crime No.301/2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, Ghaziabad and cognizance order dated 31.1.2019 passed by learned VIII Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4789 of 2019 (State vs. Amit and Others), under Sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, Ghaziabad.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that instant matter is arising out of matrimonial discord. At subsequent stage, on the consent of both the parties, a divorce petition u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act has been filed on 22.10.2024, being Petition No. 2954 of 2024. Learned Additional Principal Judge (Family Court) Vth, Ghaziabad, vide order dated 08.05.2025, has allowed the aforesaid petition on final alimony of Rs. 21,00,000/-, which has been paid to the wife (opposite party No.2). He has emphasized that, initially the matter was referred before the Mediation Centre, vide order dated 10.12.2021 passed by this court; however, same could not be proceeded owing to non appearance of O.P. No.2. Learned counsel for the applicants lastly submits that in view of the order dated 08.05.2025 passed in Petition No. 2954 of 2024 under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. may be allowed and criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.
4. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and upon perusal of record, it manifests that marriage of Amit Kumar (applicant no.1) and O.P. No.2 is finally dissolved in pursuance of the order dated 08.05.2025 passed by Additional Principal Judge (Family Court) Vth, Ghaziabad in Petition No. 2954 of 2024 u/s 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act- 1955, on final alimony of Rs. 21,00,000/- (Twenty One lakhs) As per observation made by learned Family Court, Rs. 10,00,000/- was given to O.P. No.2 at the first motion and remaining Rs. 11,00,000/- was given in second motion, at the time of final decision on the petition u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. Relevant paragraphs of order dated 08.05.2025 passed by Additional Principal Judge (Family Court) Vth, Ghaziabad on the Petition No. 2954 of 2024, are quoted herein below:
" ??? ???? ???????? ??? ??????? ???? ????????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ??? ??? ????????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ???? ??????- 1 ???? ????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????? ???? ??????-2 ???? ?? ??? ?????? 17-02-2016 ?? ??????? ??? ??? ????????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ??? ??????? ? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ??????? ?????? 03-07-2017 ?? ???-??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ????????? ?? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ??????? ???? ??? ??? ????????? ?? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? 21,00,000/- ?? ?? ??? ??? ???? 10,00,000/-?? ?? ???? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ???? 11,00,000/- ?? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ??? 1 ?????? ???? ??? 2 ?? ??????? ??? ???? ??? ?? ????????? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ??????? ?????? ??? ??????? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??????? ????? ??????? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????????? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ???
??? ?????? ???? ??????-2 ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?? ??? ?????? 17-02-2016 ?? ??????? ??? ??? ????????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ??? ??????? ? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ??????? ?????? 03-07-2017 ?? ???- ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ????????? ?? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ??????? ???? ??? ??? ????????? ?? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? 21,00,000/- ?? ?? ??? ??? ???? 10,00,000/- ?? ?? ???? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ???? 11,00,000/- ?? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ?? ???? ??? 1 ?????? ???? ??? 2 ?? ??????? ??? ???? ??? ?? ????????? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ??????? ?????? ??? ??????? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??????? ????? ??????? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????????? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ???
???????? ????????? ??? ?? ????? ????????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ?????
???? ??? ???????? ?? ?????? ?????
???????? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?? ????????? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ????? ??????-17-02-2016 ?? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??????????? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ????? ???? ?? ???? 7 ???? ????? ?? ?? ???-??? ?? ??? ??? ?? ????? ???? ????? ???? ??? 6 ??? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ??, ???? ?? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ????????? ??????? ???? ???? ????? ???
????? ??? ???? ??????? ??? ?? ???? 7 ???? ?? ????-???? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??????? ???-????? ?? ??? ??????? ??????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ???? ???? ????? ??? ??? ????-13 ?? (2) ?????? ????? ??????? ?? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???
????
???? ??????-1 ???? ????? ??? ???? ??????-2 ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ? ????? ?? ???? ?? ????-13 ?? (2) ?????? ????? ???????, 1955 ?? ???????? ????? ??????? ?? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????????? ?? ???? ??????? ??? ????? ????????-17- 02-2016 ?? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ????????? ???? ???? ???
?????? 08.05.2025"
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2 are now no more husband and wife, who have settled their dispute amicably through the petition u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act on the final alimony of Rs. 21,00,000/- Now, they are living separately and have no grudges against each other. Therefore, in the above eventuality instant application may be allowed and the entire criminal proceedings may be quashed. To quash the cognizance order as well as criminal proceeding, learned counsel for the applicant 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.
6. 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."
7. Learned A.G.A. has no objection in allowing the present application in the light of the order dated 08.05.2025 passed by Additional Principal Judge (Family Court) Vth, Ghaziabad in the aforesaid petition u/s 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act- 1955.
8. Having considered the settlement/divorce 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 and peace will be resorted. No useful purpose would be served to keep the present matter pending inasmuch as both the parties have buried the hatchet settled their dispute, it will be difficult to prove the guilt of the accused. The continuation of criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice.
9. In view of the aforesaid pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and in the light of the settlement/divorce u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, vide order dated 08.05.2025 passed by Additional Principal Judge (Family Court) Vth, Ghaziabad, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The entire criminal proceeding of the aforementioned case is hereby quashed.
10. Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action.
11. Before parting with the matter, learned counsel for the applicants has urged that the amount deposited by the applicants before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court Allahabad, in compliance of the order dated 13.12.2021 passed by this court, may be refunded to applicant no.1, inasmuch as, the medication process was never initiated for want of presence of the O.P. No.2, who never appeared despite service of notice.
12. In view of the above, Registrar/In-charge of Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Allahabad High Court, is hereby directed to examine the matter in the light of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants and refund the amount, as per law.
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)
September 4, 2025
Sumit K.
