Smt. Renu Verma v. Ashish Kumar Verma passed by additional district and session ju

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. The present revision has been filed for the following main relief:- "Wherefore it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon' ble court may kindly be please to quash judgment and order dated 28.08.2017 in criminal case no. 111/2012 Smt. Renu Verma Versus Ashish Kumar Verma passed by additional district and session judge /family court, F.T.C. (Naveen) Gonda by means of which the application of the opposite party number 2 under section 125 Cr. P.C. has been allowed and the revisionist has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 8000/- from the date of moving an application under section 125 Cr. P. C. i.e. from 6.11.2012 on each and 7th of every month and further this Hon' ble court may graciously be pleased to stay the entire proceeding arising out of judgment and order dated 28.08.2017 in criminal case no 111/2012 in Smt. Renu Verma Versus Ashish Kumar Verma passed by additional district and session judge /family court, F.T.C. (Naveen) Gonda by means of which the application of the opposite party number 2 under section 125 Cr. P.C. has been allowed and the revisionist has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 8000/- from the date of moving an application under section 125 Cr. P. C. i.e. from 6.11.2012 on each and 7th of every month contained in Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit, in the interest of justice."

3. It is stated that during the pendency of the present revision, both the parties amicably settled their dispute which in fact was matrimonial dispute and thereafter the compromise was signed by the revisionist and opposite party no.2 Renu Verma wife of Ashish Kumar Verma daughter of Bhuvneshwar Prasad Verma on 14.12.2023, which is on record as Annexure No.2 to the supplementary affidavit filed in support of application for disposal of present petition in terms of compromise.

4. It is also stated that based upon the compromise dated 14.12.2023, this Court quashed the criminal proceedings i.e. proceedings of Criminal Case No.1344 of 2012 under Sections 498A/323 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, vide order dated 20.12.2023 passed in Application under Section 482 No.11709 of 2023 (Ashish Kumar Verma Versus State of U.P. and another). The order dated

20.12.2023 reads as under:- "1. In pursuance of earlier order, parties are present and they have been duly identified by their counsel. Applicant also produced to demand drafts bearing nos.10264 and 10275 dated 12.12.2023 and 18.12.2023 of S.B.I., Balrampur Branch amount Rs.6,00,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/- respectively in the name of private respondent and the original drafts are handed over to the private respondent. Private respondent stated that as the disputed amount has already been paid to her, therefore, she has no objection in case the impugned proceedings are quashed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. Present application has been moved by the applicant for quashing the entire proceedings as well as summoning order dated 28.09.2013 passed by Additional Civil Judge-VII/Judicial Magistrate, Gonda in Criminal Case No.1344/2012 U/S 498A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the prosecution in question is a result of some matrimonial dispute between the parties. He further submitted that dispute between the parties has already been settled by way of a compromise dated 14.12.2023 and disputed amount has already been paid to the private respondent by the applicant, therefore, impugned proceedings may be quashed.

5. Learned A.G.A. has no objection, in case, the impugned proceedings are quashed as the disputed amount has already been paid to the private respondent.

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of application, compromise dated 14.12.2023, as well as other relevant documents, as the genesis of the case is matrimonial dispute and the issue has already been resolved between the parties by way of compromise dated 14.12.2023 and the disputed amount has already been paid to the private respondent, therefore, prosecution in question will be futile one.

7. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the entire proceedings as well as summoning order dated 28.09.2013 passed by Additional Civil Judge-VII/Judicial Magistrate, Gonda in Criminal Case No.1344/2012 U/S 498A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act. are hereby quashed in terms of compromise dated 14.12.2023 and statement of private respondent given before this Court today.

8. Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial court."

5. It is further submitted that vide order dated 19.03.2024, based upon the compromise the Application U/s 482 No. 1941 of 2024 (Ashish Kumar Verma Versus State of U.P. and another), Application U/s 482 No. 5070 of 2016 (Suneel Kumar Verma Versus State of U.P. and another) and Application U/s 482 No. 3296 of 2014 (Ashish Kumar Verma Versus State of U.P. and another), were allowed by this Court. The relevant portion of order dated 19.03.2024 reads as under:- "7. Learned counsel for the parties have requested that the entire proceedings of Criminal Revision No. 21/2020 (Ashish Kumar Verma vs. Smt. Renu Verma and another) passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur dated 26.11.2021 as well as summoning order dated 19.12.2019 passed by C.J.M., Balrampur in Case No. 21/2018 in Case no. 1292/2017 u/s 406, 420, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Balrampur on the basis of compromise dated 14.12.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Revision No. 84 of 2015, Suneet Kumar verma vs. Ashish Kumar Verma and impugned summoning order dated 9.4.2014, passed by Judicial Magistrate / Upper Civil Judge (J.D.)-1, Balrampur in Criminal Complaint Case No. 382/2014, Ashish Kumar Verma vs. Suneet Kumar Verma and others and may also be pleased to quash the order dated 16.07.2016 passed in Complaint Case No. 382/2014 (supra) on the basis of fact that the parties have settled their dispute amicably.

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the issue in question, particularly, the fact that the present petitioners and the private opposite party have settled the dispute through compromise and the same has been made part of the record, therefore, compelling the prosecution to prosecute the present petitioners would be a futile exercise and in view of the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471; Parbatbhai AAhir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are hereby quashed. The compromise between the parties would be the part of this order.

9. Accordingly, the petitions bearing APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1941 of 2024 and APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5070 of 2016 are allowed."

6. It is further stated that in view of aforesaid facts of the case, the present revision be allowed and the entire proceeding arising out of judgment and order dated 28.08.2017 be quashed in terms of compromise.

7. Considering the aforesaid, this Court finds that the present revision is liable to be allowed in terms of compromise.

8. Ordered accordingly. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Anand/- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. The present revision has been filed for the following main relief:- "Wherefore it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon' ble court may kindly be please to quash judgment and order dated 28.08.2017 in criminal case no. 111/2012 Smt. Renu Verma Versus Ashish Kumar Verma passed by additional district and session judge /family court, F.T.C. (Naveen) Gonda by means of which the application of the opposite party number 2 under section 125 Cr. P.C. has been allowed and the revisionist has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 8000/- from the date of moving an application under section 125 Cr. P. C. i.e. from 6.11.2012 on each and 7th of every month and further this Hon' ble court may graciously be pleased to stay the entire proceeding arising out of judgment and order dated 28.08.2017 in criminal case no 111/2012 in Smt. Renu Verma Versus Ashish Kumar Verma passed by additional district and session judge /family court, F.T.C. (Naveen) Gonda by means of which the application of the opposite party number 2 under section 125 Cr. P.C. has been allowed and the revisionist has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 8000/- from the date of moving an application under section 125 Cr. P. C. i.e. from 6.11.2012 on each and 7th of every month contained in Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit, in the interest of justice."

3. It is stated that during the pendency of the present revision, both the parties amicably settled their dispute which in fact was matrimonial dispute and thereafter the compromise was signed by the revisionist and opposite party no.2 Renu Verma wife of Ashish Kumar Verma daughter of Bhuvneshwar Prasad Verma on 14.12.2023, which is on record as Annexure No.2 to the supplementary affidavit filed in support of application for disposal of present petition in terms of compromise.

4. It is also stated that based upon the compromise dated 14.12.2023, this Court quashed the criminal proceedings i.e. proceedings of Criminal Case No.1344 of 2012 under Sections 498A/323 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, vide order dated 20.12.2023 passed in Application under Section 482 No.11709 of 2023 (Ashish Kumar Verma Versus State of U.P. and another). The order dated

20.12.2023 reads as under:- "1. In pursuance of earlier order, parties are present and they have been duly identified by their counsel. Applicant also produced to demand drafts bearing nos.10264 and 10275 dated 12.12.2023 and 18.12.2023 of S.B.I., Balrampur Branch amount Rs.6,00,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/- respectively in the name of private respondent and the original drafts are handed over to the private respondent. Private respondent stated that as the disputed amount has already been paid to her, therefore, she has no objection in case the impugned proceedings are quashed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. Present application has been moved by the applicant for quashing the entire proceedings as well as summoning order dated 28.09.2013 passed by Additional Civil Judge-VII/Judicial Magistrate, Gonda in Criminal Case No.1344/2012 U/S 498A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the prosecution in question is a result of some matrimonial dispute between the parties. He further submitted that dispute between the parties has already been settled by way of a compromise dated 14.12.2023 and disputed amount has already been paid to the private respondent by the applicant, therefore, impugned proceedings may be quashed.

5. Learned A.G.A. has no objection, in case, the impugned proceedings are quashed as the disputed amount has already been paid to the private respondent.

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of application, compromise dated 14.12.2023, as well as other relevant documents, as the genesis of the case is matrimonial dispute and the issue has already been resolved between the parties by way of compromise dated 14.12.2023 and the disputed amount has already been paid to the private respondent, therefore, prosecution in question will be futile one.

7. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the entire proceedings as well as summoning order dated 28.09.2013 passed by Additional Civil Judge-VII/Judicial Magistrate, Gonda in Criminal Case No.1344/2012 U/S 498A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act. are hereby quashed in terms of compromise dated 14.12.2023 and statement of private respondent given before this Court today.

8. Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial court."

5. It is further submitted that vide order dated 19.03.2024, based upon the compromise the Application U/s 482 No. 1941 of 2024 (Ashish Kumar Verma Versus State of U.P. and another), Application U/s 482 No. 5070 of 2016 (Suneel Kumar Verma Versus State of U.P. and another) and Application U/s 482 No. 3296 of 2014 (Ashish Kumar Verma Versus State of U.P. and another), were allowed by this Court. The relevant portion of order dated 19.03.2024 reads as under:- "7. Learned counsel for the parties have requested that the entire proceedings of Criminal Revision No. 21/2020 (Ashish Kumar Verma vs. Smt. Renu Verma and another) passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur dated 26.11.2021 as well as summoning order dated 19.12.2019 passed by C.J.M., Balrampur in Case No. 21/2018 in Case no. 1292/2017 u/s 406, 420, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Balrampur on the basis of compromise dated 14.12.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Revision No. 84 of 2015, Suneet Kumar verma vs. Ashish Kumar Verma and impugned summoning order dated 9.4.2014, passed by Judicial Magistrate / Upper Civil Judge (J.D.)-1, Balrampur in Criminal Complaint Case No. 382/2014, Ashish Kumar Verma vs. Suneet Kumar Verma and others and may also be pleased to quash the order dated 16.07.2016 passed in Complaint Case No. 382/2014 (supra) on the basis of fact that the parties have settled their dispute amicably.

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the issue in question, particularly, the fact that the present petitioners and the private opposite party have settled the dispute through compromise and the same has been made part of the record, therefore, compelling the prosecution to prosecute the present petitioners would be a futile exercise and in view of the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471; Parbatbhai AAhir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are hereby quashed. The compromise between the parties would be the part of this order.

9. Accordingly, the petitions bearing APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1941 of 2024 and APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5070 of 2016 are allowed."

6. It is further stated that in view of aforesaid facts of the case, the present revision be allowed and the entire proceeding arising out of judgment and order dated 28.08.2017 be quashed in terms of compromise.

7. Considering the aforesaid, this Court finds that the present revision is liable to be allowed in terms of compromise.

8. Ordered accordingly. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Anand/- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench