Shahjad and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 69 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9710 of 2023 Applicant :- Shahjad And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Zaid Arshad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶1List revised.

¶2Heard Sri Anjani Kumar Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Sri Zaid Arshad, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Bade Lal Bind learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

¶3The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants-Shahjad, Shahida and Wajid, with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the entire proceeding as well as summoning order dated

09.12.2022 in Complaint Case No. 208 of 2021 (Smt. Nazma Vs. Shahzad & others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Nakudh, District Saharanpur, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.), District Saharanpur. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application.

¶4The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated

31.03.2023 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶5As per report of Mediation Centre dated 03.10.2023 the parties have entered into settlement dated 03.10.2023 in view of Interim Settlement dated 11.07.2023 and have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶6As per the office report dated 16.11.2023 a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record.

¶7From perusal of the report of Mediation Centre of this Court, it appears that in pursuance of the said order the mediation proceedings were taken up which ended in a settlement dated 03.10.2023 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising out in the present matter. The parties have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in para 7 (k) of the said mediation report. The matter has been settled and the parties being husband and wife have reunited and have decided to live together.

¶8The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.

¶9From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicants.

¶10The present application is allowed.

¶11The proceedings of the present case as well as the summoning order are hereby quashed. Order Date :- 17.11.2023 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad