High Court · 2025

" Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.244 of 2019; State Versus Naveen Chandra Verma, arising out of Case Crime No.327 of 2018, Under Sections-498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506, 494 I.P.C., relating to Police Station- Gudamba, District- Lucknow, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow, impugned chargesheet dated 23.10.2018, submitted by the Investigating OfÏcer against the petitioner, in aforesaid case crime number, impugned cognizance order dated 27.3.2019 as well as impugned summoning order dated 1.6.2019 and impugned order of Bailable Warrant dated 21.10.2021, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate- II, Lucknow, as contained in Annexure nos. 1 and 2 respectively to this petition, in the interest of law and justice."

2. This court by an order dated 23.08.2024, referred the matter to Mediation Centre of this Court so as to carve out possibility of amicable settlement of dispute between the parties, which is quoted hereinbelow:- "Heard. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 23.10.2018 filed in Case Crime No.327 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506, 494 I.P.C., Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow as well as, cognizance order dated 27.03.2019, summoning order dated 01.06.2019 and bailable warrant dated 21.10.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow. It is stated by learned Counsel for the parties that the dispute which is matrimonial dispute could be settled and decided amicably by way of mediation. To show the bona fide, it is stated that the applicant would deposit Rs. 20,000/- before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court within one week from today. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties including that dispute between the parties can be settled amicably by way of mediation, this Court finds that the matter requires consideration. Taking note of the aforesaid, let the matter be placed before Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on 04.09.2024. The applicant shall deposit an amount of Rs. 20,000/- before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court within one week from today, which shall be released in favour of the opposite party No. 2. List/put up this case before this Court on 03.10..2024 as fresh along with mediation report. Till the next date of listing, the proceedings in issue against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance. In case, the amount aforesaid is not deposited by the applicant within the specified time, the interim protection granted by this Court shall not be available to applicant. Learned counsel for the parties shall ensure the presence of the parties before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on the date fixed by this Court. "

3. It also appears that in compliance of order of this Court dated 23.08.2024, a Settlement Agreement has entered into between the applicant and respondent no. 2. The Mediation and Conciliation Centre has sent its report along with the settlement agreement dated 03.04.2025, which is on the record.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has submitted that the settlement agreement has been executed between the parties and now he has no grudge against the applicant and the respondent no. 4 does not want to proceed with the criminal proceedings pending against the applicant.

5. Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435, according to which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409, according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlement entered into between the parties in the mediation proceedings as mentioned above, the criminal proceedings can be quashed, as also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and hence no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.

6. In view of above, the present application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceeding, quoted above, are hereby quashed as far as it is related to the applicant.

7. OfÏce/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 DiVYa DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

" Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.244 of 2019; State Versus Naveen Chandra Verma, arising out of Case Crime No.327 of 2018, Under Sections-498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506, 494 I.P.C., relating to Police Station- Gudamba, District- Lucknow, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow, impugned chargesheet dated 23.10.2018, submitted by the Investigating OfÏcer against the petitioner, in aforesaid case crime number, impugned cognizance order dated 27.3.2019 as well as impugned summoning order dated 1.6.2019 and impugned order of Bailable Warrant dated 21.10.2021, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate- II, Lucknow, as contained in Annexure nos. 1 and 2 respectively to this petition, in the interest of law and justice."

2. This court by an order dated 23.08.2024, referred the matter to Mediation Centre of this Court so as to carve out possibility of amicable settlement of dispute between the parties, which is quoted hereinbelow:- "Heard. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 23.10.2018 filed in Case Crime No.327 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506, 494 I.P.C., Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow as well as, cognizance order dated 27.03.2019, summoning order dated 01.06.2019 and bailable warrant dated 21.10.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow. It is stated by learned Counsel for the parties that the dispute which is matrimonial dispute could be settled and decided amicably by way of mediation. To show the bona fide, it is stated that the applicant would deposit Rs. 20,000/- before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court within one week from today. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties including that dispute between the parties can be settled amicably by way of mediation, this Court finds that the matter requires consideration. Taking note of the aforesaid, let the matter be placed before Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on 04.09.2024. The applicant shall deposit an amount of Rs. 20,000/- before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court within one week from today, which shall be released in favour of the opposite party No. 2. List/put up this case before this Court on 03.10..2024 as fresh along with mediation report. Till the next date of listing, the proceedings in issue against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance. In case, the amount aforesaid is not deposited by the applicant within the specified time, the interim protection granted by this Court shall not be available to applicant. Learned counsel for the parties shall ensure the presence of the parties before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on the date fixed by this Court. "

3. It also appears that in compliance of order of this Court dated 23.08.2024, a Settlement Agreement has entered into between the applicant and respondent no. 2. The Mediation and Conciliation Centre has sent its report along with the settlement agreement dated 03.04.2025, which is on the record.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has submitted that the settlement agreement has been executed between the parties and now he has no grudge against the applicant and the respondent no. 4 does not want to proceed with the criminal proceedings pending against the applicant.

5. Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435, according to which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409, according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlement entered into between the parties in the mediation proceedings as mentioned above, the criminal proceedings can be quashed, as also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and hence no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.

6. In view of above, the present application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceeding, quoted above, are hereby quashed as far as it is related to the applicant.

7. OfÏce/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 DiVYa DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench