Mr. Vinod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the opposite party v. Nishant Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime

2. Heard Mr. Digvijay Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Vinod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Mr. Satendra Tiwari, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 02.01.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.36 of 2024 (State vs. Nishant Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime No.272 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Mughalsarai, District- Chandauli, pending before the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), FTC-1/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli on the basis of compromise.

4. Earlier on 23.09.2024, the following order was passed:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima facie case is made out against them. Earlier applicants have filed a writ petition before this Court for quashing of the first information report, wherein the matter was referred for mediation and during mediation proceedings, both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and a settlement deed was prepared, which is available on record. Meanwhile the said writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution. It was submitted that as both the parties have already settled the dispute, thus, the impugned proceedings may be quashed. Matter requires consideration. Issue notice to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. Opposite parties may file counter affidavit within four weeks. Put up as fresh on 21.10.2024. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants, namely, Nishant Kumar Gupta, Abha Rani and Himanshu Gupta in Case No. 36/2024, arising out of case crime no. 272/2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354-B IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mughalsarai, district Chandauli, pending in the court of C.J. (J.D.), FTC-1/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli. "

5. Thereafter, on 19.11.2024, the following order was passed:- "Learned counsel for the opposite party has pointed out that as per the terms and conditions mentioned in the petition u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act as well settlement agreement as arrived between the parties at the Mediation Centre, Allahabad High Court, the demand draft of Rs.11,00,000/- in favour of the wife towards maintenance of son Charavic Mani Samarth has not been paid till date. Learned counsel for the applicants submits next date fixed before the Court below is 21.11.2024. Accordingly, put up as fresh on 27.11.2024. Interim order, if any, is extended till the next date of listing."

6. Thereafter, on 27.11.2024, the following order was passed:- "In compliance of order dated 19.11.2024, learned counsel for the applicants has come up with an undated cheque mentioning Rs.11/- lac. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he is ready and willing to deposit the amount for maintenance of his son Charvik Mani Samarthya. Learned counsel for the applicants is directed to deposit Rs.11/- lac in an interest bearing scheme of Fixed Deposit in the name of Charvik Mani Samarthya, for certain period, which can be withdrawn by son on attaining the age of majority. In case, the aforesaid money is required for some extreme exigency like further studies or in case of unforeseen circumstances, an application shall be moved by his mother before the Court concerned to withdraw the amount. No amount shall be paid, except to the son before attaining the age of majority, without permission of the Court. As prayed, put up as fresh on 12.12.2024. Interim order, if any, is extended till the next date of listing."

7. Subsequently, on 12.12.2024, the following order was passed:- "Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in compliance of the order dated 27.11.2024, he has deposited an amount of Rs. 11 Lakh in an interest bearing scheme of fixed deposit in the name of Charvik Mani Samarthya. He prays for two days' time to file an affidavit showing the said deposit. Put up this case on 18.12.2024, as fresh. Interim order, if any, shall continue till the next date of listing."

8. Thereafter, on 18.12.2024, the following order was passed:- "Supplementary Affidavit, filed today, is taken on record. In compliance of the order of this Court passed on previous occasion i.e. 12.12.2024, learned counsel for the applicants has brought on record deposit receipt / KDR ? Court Deposit General dated 06.12.2024 issued by Canara Bank, Branch Khurja for an amount of Rs. 11 lakh in favour of Charvik Mani Samarthya under the guardianship of Mrs. Manisha/ opposite party no. 2. A photostat copy of said deposit receipt is annexed as Annexure SA-1 (Page-7) of the supplementary affidavit filed today. A note has been endorsed on the said receipt that same be not released without court's order or until the customer attains maturity i.e. 18 years. Learned counsel for the applicants informs that the next date before the family court in the proceedings under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, is fixed as 04.01.2025. In view of the the aforesaid, the applicants are permitted to deposit the aforementioned original Deposit Receipt/ KDR - Court Deposit General before the Family Court, Chandauli in the proceedings pending under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act on the next date i.e. 04.01.2025. The Family Court shall handover the said original KDR to opposite party no. 2 on her Put up this case on 10.01.2025 as fresh. Meanwhile, the parties shall withdraw the cases filed against each other and place the said status in that regard by way of a supplementary affidavit on the next date. said date. appearance before Interim order, granted earlier, shall continue till the next date of listing."

9. Subsequently, on 10.01.2025, the following order was passed:- "Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants today in the Court, is taken on record. List revised. None appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 to press this case. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 02.01.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.36 of 2024 (State of U.P. vs. Nishant Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime No.272 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mughalsarai, District-Chandauli, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.), FTC-I/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli. In compliance of order dated 18.12.2024, the applicants have deposited the original Deposit Receipt/KDR-Court Deposit General before the Family Court, Chandauli in the proceedings pending under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act on 06.01.2025. The aforesaid Deposit Receipt / KDR-Court Deposit General has been handed over to the opposite party no.2 on 06.01.2025 in the proceedings U/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act pending before the Family Court. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 was expected to file supplementary affidavit mentioning therein that the cases pending against each other have been withdrawn. The absence of counsel for the opposite party no.2 shows the conduct of the opposite party no.2, who after receiving the amount has not instructed her counsel to appear in the matter. In view of the above, further proceedings pursuant to the aforesaid case shall remain stayed against the applicants herein until further order of this Court. Put up this case on 04.02.2025, as fresh."

10. Thereafter, on 19.02.2025, the following order was passed:- "Second supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicants in Court today, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the case. Mr. Digvijay Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Sanjay Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vinod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. are present. When the case was taken up, Mr. Sanjay Yadav, Advocate having enrollment no.UP2842/2003, Mob. No.7526059685, holding brief of Mr. Vinod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, informs that some case filed against opposite party no.2 is pending at Bulandshahar, which has not been withdrawn by the applicants till date. When the court raised specific query about the details of the case, he states that he is holding brief of Mr. Vinod Kumar Maurya and is not in a position to give the details of the case, he argued in a casual manner and acted in unwelcoming manner. An advocate, holding brief of another counsel too, is supposed to be fully prepared and aware of the facts of the case. However, the response, which learned counsel holding brief in the present case exuded, was not only casual but very inappropriate, which is not expected from a practicing lawyer of this Court. Such kind of practice and attitude of a counsel evinces fall in efficiency and standards at Bar. It results in sheer wastage of precious time of the Courts. Though the Court desired to refer the matter to the Bar Council, however, acceding request of the learned counsel with an assurance to improve his demeanour, no direction is issued in that regard. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 02.01.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.36 of 2024 (State of U.P. vs. Nishant Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime No.272 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mughalsarai, District-Chandauli, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.), FTC-I/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in terms of mutual divorce petition, he has already paid the amount to the opposite party no.2, however, after receiving the amount, opposite party no.2 is not appearing before the concerned Court and learned counsel representing the opposite party no.2 appeared on the last occasion i.e. 10.02.2025 before this Court. He further submits that as the mutual divorce petition has been filed and the terms and conditions have been fulfilled as detailed in the order annexed at page-7 of the application, therefore, continuance of proceedings against the applicants would nothing but an abuse of process of law. Put up as fresh on 24.02.2025. Until further orders, proceedings of the aforesaid case shall remain stayed. The matter will not be adjourned on the next date on any ground."

11. Today, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 raised objection regarding pendency of one case filed by the applicants against opposite party no.2 about which nothing was mentioned at any stage. On which learned counsel for the applicants has passed on a photocopy of order dated 24.05.2024 in Complaint Case No.1546 of 2022 (Nishant Gupta vs. Manisha), under Section 406 IPC, which has been withdrawn in view of the settlement dated 05.12.2023 between the parties at Allahabad High Court Medication Centre. Copy of the order dated 24.05.2024 is taken on record.

12. Learned counsel for the parties submits that in view of the settlement agreement, nothing remains between the parties and, therefore, further proceedings against the applicants in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.

13. Learned A.G.A. for the State does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, he has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.

14. Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:-

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. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,

15. In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278. in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

16. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

17. Accordingly, the summoning order dated 02.01.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.36 of 2024 (State vs. Nishant Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime No.272 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Mughalsarai, District- Chandauli, pending before the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), FTC-1/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli is hereby quashed.

18. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

19. It is always open to the parties to approach before this Court in case verification has been done by playing fraud.

20. A copy of this order be sent to the lower court forthwith. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Jitendra/- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Mr. Digvijay Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Vinod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Mr. Satendra Tiwari, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 02.01.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.36 of 2024 (State vs. Nishant Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime No.272 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Mughalsarai, District- Chandauli, pending before the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), FTC-1/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli on the basis of compromise.

4. Earlier on 23.09.2024, the following order was passed:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima facie case is made out against them. Earlier applicants have filed a writ petition before this Court for quashing of the first information report, wherein the matter was referred for mediation and during mediation proceedings, both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and a settlement deed was prepared, which is available on record. Meanwhile the said writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution. It was submitted that as both the parties have already settled the dispute, thus, the impugned proceedings may be quashed. Matter requires consideration. Issue notice to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. Opposite parties may file counter affidavit within four weeks. Put up as fresh on 21.10.2024. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants, namely, Nishant Kumar Gupta, Abha Rani and Himanshu Gupta in Case No. 36/2024, arising out of case crime no. 272/2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354-B IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mughalsarai, district Chandauli, pending in the court of C.J. (J.D.), FTC-1/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli. "

5. Thereafter, on 19.11.2024, the following order was passed:- "Learned counsel for the opposite party has pointed out that as per the terms and conditions mentioned in the petition u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act as well settlement agreement as arrived between the parties at the Mediation Centre, Allahabad High Court, the demand draft of Rs.11,00,000/- in favour of the wife towards maintenance of son Charavic Mani Samarth has not been paid till date. Learned counsel for the applicants submits next date fixed before the Court below is 21.11.2024. Accordingly, put up as fresh on 27.11.2024. Interim order, if any, is extended till the next date of listing."

6. Thereafter, on 27.11.2024, the following order was passed:- "In compliance of order dated 19.11.2024, learned counsel for the applicants has come up with an undated cheque mentioning Rs.11/- lac. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he is ready and willing to deposit the amount for maintenance of his son Charvik Mani Samarthya. Learned counsel for the applicants is directed to deposit Rs.11/- lac in an interest bearing scheme of Fixed Deposit in the name of Charvik Mani Samarthya, for certain period, which can be withdrawn by son on attaining the age of majority. In case, the aforesaid money is required for some extreme exigency like further studies or in case of unforeseen circumstances, an application shall be moved by his mother before the Court concerned to withdraw the amount. No amount shall be paid, except to the son before attaining the age of majority, without permission of the Court. As prayed, put up as fresh on 12.12.2024. Interim order, if any, is extended till the next date of listing."

7. Subsequently, on 12.12.2024, the following order was passed:- "Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in compliance of the order dated 27.11.2024, he has deposited an amount of Rs. 11 Lakh in an interest bearing scheme of fixed deposit in the name of Charvik Mani Samarthya. He prays for two days' time to file an affidavit showing the said deposit. Put up this case on 18.12.2024, as fresh. Interim order, if any, shall continue till the next date of listing."

8. Thereafter, on 18.12.2024, the following order was passed:- "Supplementary Affidavit, filed today, is taken on record. In compliance of the order of this Court passed on previous occasion i.e. 12.12.2024, learned counsel for the applicants has brought on record deposit receipt / KDR ? Court Deposit General dated 06.12.2024 issued by Canara Bank, Branch Khurja for an amount of Rs. 11 lakh in favour of Charvik Mani Samarthya under the guardianship of Mrs. Manisha/ opposite party no. 2. A photostat copy of said deposit receipt is annexed as Annexure SA-1 (Page-7) of the supplementary affidavit filed today. A note has been endorsed on the said receipt that same be not released without court's order or until the customer attains maturity i.e. 18 years. Learned counsel for the applicants informs that the next date before the family court in the proceedings under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, is fixed as 04.01.2025. In view of the the aforesaid, the applicants are permitted to deposit the aforementioned original Deposit Receipt/ KDR - Court Deposit General before the Family Court, Chandauli in the proceedings pending under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act on the next date i.e. 04.01.2025. The Family Court shall handover the said original KDR to opposite party no. 2 on her Put up this case on 10.01.2025 as fresh. Meanwhile, the parties shall withdraw the cases filed against each other and place the said status in that regard by way of a supplementary affidavit on the next date. said date. appearance before Interim order, granted earlier, shall continue till the next date of listing."

9. Subsequently, on 10.01.2025, the following order was passed:- "Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants today in the Court, is taken on record. List revised. None appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 to press this case. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 02.01.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.36 of 2024 (State of U.P. vs. Nishant Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime No.272 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mughalsarai, District-Chandauli, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.), FTC-I/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli. In compliance of order dated 18.12.2024, the applicants have deposited the original Deposit Receipt/KDR-Court Deposit General before the Family Court, Chandauli in the proceedings pending under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act on 06.01.2025. The aforesaid Deposit Receipt / KDR-Court Deposit General has been handed over to the opposite party no.2 on 06.01.2025 in the proceedings U/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act pending before the Family Court. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 was expected to file supplementary affidavit mentioning therein that the cases pending against each other have been withdrawn. The absence of counsel for the opposite party no.2 shows the conduct of the opposite party no.2, who after receiving the amount has not instructed her counsel to appear in the matter. In view of the above, further proceedings pursuant to the aforesaid case shall remain stayed against the applicants herein until further order of this Court. Put up this case on 04.02.2025, as fresh."

10. Thereafter, on 19.02.2025, the following order was passed:- "Second supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicants in Court today, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the case. Mr. Digvijay Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Sanjay Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vinod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. are present. When the case was taken up, Mr. Sanjay Yadav, Advocate having enrollment no.UP2842/2003, Mob. No.7526059685, holding brief of Mr. Vinod Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, informs that some case filed against opposite party no.2 is pending at Bulandshahar, which has not been withdrawn by the applicants till date. When the court raised specific query about the details of the case, he states that he is holding brief of Mr. Vinod Kumar Maurya and is not in a position to give the details of the case, he argued in a casual manner and acted in unwelcoming manner. An advocate, holding brief of another counsel too, is supposed to be fully prepared and aware of the facts of the case. However, the response, which learned counsel holding brief in the present case exuded, was not only casual but very inappropriate, which is not expected from a practicing lawyer of this Court. Such kind of practice and attitude of a counsel evinces fall in efficiency and standards at Bar. It results in sheer wastage of precious time of the Courts. Though the Court desired to refer the matter to the Bar Council, however, acceding request of the learned counsel with an assurance to improve his demeanour, no direction is issued in that regard. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 02.01.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.36 of 2024 (State of U.P. vs. Nishant Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime No.272 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mughalsarai, District-Chandauli, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.), FTC-I/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in terms of mutual divorce petition, he has already paid the amount to the opposite party no.2, however, after receiving the amount, opposite party no.2 is not appearing before the concerned Court and learned counsel representing the opposite party no.2 appeared on the last occasion i.e. 10.02.2025 before this Court. He further submits that as the mutual divorce petition has been filed and the terms and conditions have been fulfilled as detailed in the order annexed at page-7 of the application, therefore, continuance of proceedings against the applicants would nothing but an abuse of process of law. Put up as fresh on 24.02.2025. Until further orders, proceedings of the aforesaid case shall remain stayed. The matter will not be adjourned on the next date on any ground."

11. Today, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 raised objection regarding pendency of one case filed by the applicants against opposite party no.2 about which nothing was mentioned at any stage. On which learned counsel for the applicants has passed on a photocopy of order dated 24.05.2024 in Complaint Case No.1546 of 2022 (Nishant Gupta vs. Manisha), under Section 406 IPC, which has been withdrawn in view of the settlement dated 05.12.2023 between the parties at Allahabad High Court Medication Centre. Copy of the order dated 24.05.2024 is taken on record.

12. Learned counsel for the parties submits that in view of the settlement agreement, nothing remains between the parties and, therefore, further proceedings against the applicants in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.

13. Learned A.G.A. for the State does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, he has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.

14. Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:-

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. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,

15. In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278. in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

16. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

17. Accordingly, the summoning order dated 02.01.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.36 of 2024 (State vs. Nishant Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime No.272 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 354B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Mughalsarai, District- Chandauli, pending before the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), FTC-1/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli is hereby quashed.

18. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

19. It is always open to the parties to approach before this Court in case verification has been done by playing fraud.

20. A copy of this order be sent to the lower court forthwith. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Jitendra/- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad