Jamshed Khan And 3 Others v. State of U.P & Anr.

In view of the above statement of Registrar (Criminal), no further order is required to be passed and his personal appearance is exempted.

Heard Sri Shyam Sunder Maurya, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Mithilesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to set- aside the entire proceedings as Complaint Case No. 2998 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station- Dildar Nagar, District- Ghazipur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghazipur, and summoning order dated

20.7.2023 as well as order dated 24.1.2024, by which non bailable warrant has been issued.

Learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that they have settled their dispute amicably and a written compromise between them has also been verified and they have executed a settlement agreement before the Mediation Centre, High Court, Allahabad. Therefore, proceeding may be quashed on the basis of settlement agreement dated

01.10.2024.

On perusal of the order sheet, it appears that this case was referred to the Mediation Centre, High Court, Allahabad vide order dated 22.03.2024. In pursuance of that order, parties have appeared before the Mediation Centre and finally a settlement agreement dated 01.10.2024 has also been entered into between them. Paragraph no.7 of the Settlement Agreement dated 01.10.2024 is quoted as under: "7. In view of the Interim Settlement dated 25.06.2024, the following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:- a) That the parites have already settled their dispute and decided to dissolve their marriage by getting Talaq and in this regard parties have prepared a notarized Halafnama dated 24.09.2024. The parties shall produce the copy of the aforesaid Halafnama dated 24.09.2024 at the time of hearing before the Hon'ble Court. b) That it has already been decided that the Husband would pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) to the wife towards Meher, Iddat Period, Maintenance and other financial claims of her, by way of demand draft. c) That today i.e. 01.10.2024, the husband had produced a demant draft bearing No.395816 dated 25.09.2024 of Rs.1,00,000/- drawn on Bank of Baroda in favour of Ruby Parveen (wife), the said demand draft is being handed over to the O.P. No.2-wife and she has acknowledged the receipt of the same. "

As the parties have settled their dispute amicably and a settlement agreement has been entered into between them before the Mediation Centre, High Court, Allahabad, in such circumstances, permitting to continue the impugned proceeding will amount to travesty of justice.

Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana), J.T. 2008(9) SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of investigation and another), (2012) 10 SCC 303 (Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab), (2014) 9 SCC 653 (Yogendra Yadav and others Vs. State of Jharkhand) and also (2014) 6 SCC 466 (Narendra Singh Vs. State of Punjab), and in view of the settlement agreement dated 01.10.2024, the proceeding of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

The present petition is, accordingly, allowed. Order Date :- 4.12.2024 S.Chaurasia