High Court · 2025

same are being disposed of by a common order.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s), learned counsel for opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

3. Application No.3982 of 2023 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for the following main relief(s):- "For the facts, reasons and circumstances as stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No. 71/2021 (CIS No. 584/2021), under Sections 498A/323 IPC & ¼ D.P. Act, Police Station- and Madmoodabad, District-Sitapur, cognizance summoning order dated 17.09.2021, proceed by the concerned learned Court of Judicial Magistrate, Second, Sitapur in the present complaint case of Suyeba Khatoon versus Jiyauddin and others), which is pending before him."

4. Application No.9150 of 2023 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the following main relief(s):- "For the facts, reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the Entire Criminal Proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No. 71/2021, CIS No. 584/2021, Under Section-498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section-3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahmoodabad, District-Sitapur, cognizance and summoning order dated-17.09.2021 proceed by the concerned Learned Court of Judicial Magistrate, Second, Sitapur in the present complaint case of Suyeba Khatoon Versus Jiyauddin and others, which is pending before him."

5. Indisputably, the dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature as a Complaint Case No.71 of 2021 (CIS No.584/2021), under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was lodged by opposite party no.2. The matter has been settled, as appears from Annexure -D to the report of Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court in Form 5 -Annexure -E. Para 6 of the settlement between the parties reads as under. "6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto: A) That the parties have decided to live together, alongwith their daughter Lyba aged about 4 years happily and peacefully. B) That the parties have agreed to perform their matrimonial obligations with utmost respect, love and affection towards each other. C) That both the parties have agreed to discharge their matrimonial obligations/duties without any kind of misbehaviour or harassment to each other and each other's family members. D) That the parties have agreed that no family member of either of the parties will allowed to interfere in their peaceful living and performance of matrimonial obligations. E) That the parties have agreed to take good care of their daughter Lyba with regard to maintenance, education, upbringing, daily needs and all other responsibilities. F) That the parties have agreed that the First Party-husband shall bear all the financial responsibilities of his daughter and wife. G) That the parties have agreed that they shall not have any objection if the Hon'ble Court decides the APPLICATION U/s 482 No.9150 of 2023 (Jiyauddin Ansari Vs State of U.P. & Another) arising out of C.I.S. No.584 of 2021 arising out of Complaint Case No.71 of 2021 U/Ss 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 D. P Act, P S.-Mahmoodabad, District-Lucknow in terms of this Settlement Agreement. H) That the parties have agreed to withdraw/ not press the cases filed against each other. The detail of the cases are mentioned hereunder : (i) C.I.S. No.584 of 2021 arising out of Complaint Case No.71 of 2021 U/Ss 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 D. P Act, P S.-Mahmoodabad, District-Lucknow. (ii) Case No.72 of 2021 U/S 12 D. V. Act pending before J. M.-II, Sitapur. (iii) Case No. 82 of 2022 U/S 125 Cr.P.C. pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Sitapur. (ii) That the parties have agreed that apart from mentioned case, if any other criminal/civil case(s) is pending between the parties or their family members with regard to the present dispute, both the parties shall get the same disposed off in terms of this Settlement Agreement. J) That it is also agreed between the parties that henceforth no case will be instituted by them against each other or any of their respective family members in future in the form of criminal or civil proceedings in respect of present dispute. K) That both the parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Settlement Agreement in strict sense. In case of any default, the party committing default shall be liable for playing fraud with the Court, hence for contempt of the Court.

7. By signing this Agreement the Parties hereto state that they have no claims or demands against each other with respect to APPLICATION U/s 482 No.9150 of 2023 (Jiyauddin Ansari Vs State of UP & Another) and all disputes and differences in this regard have been amicably settled by the Parties hereto through the process of Conciliation/Mediation."

6. It is stated that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the present proceedings are liable to be quashed.

7. 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 settlements between the parties 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. Accordingly, present applications are allowed in view of the settlement and the observations made hereinabove. Consequently, the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.71 of 2021 (Supra), indicated in the prayer, quoted above, are hereby quashed in view of settlement.

8. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 4.8.2025 Anand/- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

same are being disposed of by a common order.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s), learned counsel for opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

3. Application No.3982 of 2023 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for the following main relief(s):- "For the facts, reasons and circumstances as stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No. 71/2021 (CIS No. 584/2021), under Sections 498A/323 IPC & ¼ D.P. Act, Police Station- and Madmoodabad, District-Sitapur, cognizance summoning order dated 17.09.2021, proceed by the concerned learned Court of Judicial Magistrate, Second, Sitapur in the present complaint case of Suyeba Khatoon versus Jiyauddin and others), which is pending before him."

4. Application No.9150 of 2023 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the following main relief(s):- "For the facts, reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the Entire Criminal Proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No. 71/2021, CIS No. 584/2021, Under Section-498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section-3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahmoodabad, District-Sitapur, cognizance and summoning order dated-17.09.2021 proceed by the concerned Learned Court of Judicial Magistrate, Second, Sitapur in the present complaint case of Suyeba Khatoon Versus Jiyauddin and others, which is pending before him."

5. Indisputably, the dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature as a Complaint Case No.71 of 2021 (CIS No.584/2021), under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was lodged by opposite party no.2. The matter has been settled, as appears from Annexure -D to the report of Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court in Form 5 -Annexure -E. Para 6 of the settlement between the parties reads as under. "6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto: A) That the parties have decided to live together, alongwith their daughter Lyba aged about 4 years happily and peacefully. B) That the parties have agreed to perform their matrimonial obligations with utmost respect, love and affection towards each other. C) That both the parties have agreed to discharge their matrimonial obligations/duties without any kind of misbehaviour or harassment to each other and each other's family members. D) That the parties have agreed that no family member of either of the parties will allowed to interfere in their peaceful living and performance of matrimonial obligations. E) That the parties have agreed to take good care of their daughter Lyba with regard to maintenance, education, upbringing, daily needs and all other responsibilities. F) That the parties have agreed that the First Party-husband shall bear all the financial responsibilities of his daughter and wife. G) That the parties have agreed that they shall not have any objection if the Hon'ble Court decides the APPLICATION U/s 482 No.9150 of 2023 (Jiyauddin Ansari Vs State of U.P. & Another) arising out of C.I.S. No.584 of 2021 arising out of Complaint Case No.71 of 2021 U/Ss 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 D. P Act, P S.-Mahmoodabad, District-Lucknow in terms of this Settlement Agreement. H) That the parties have agreed to withdraw/ not press the cases filed against each other. The detail of the cases are mentioned hereunder : (i) C.I.S. No.584 of 2021 arising out of Complaint Case No.71 of 2021 U/Ss 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 D. P Act, P S.-Mahmoodabad, District-Lucknow. (ii) Case No.72 of 2021 U/S 12 D. V. Act pending before J. M.-II, Sitapur. (iii) Case No. 82 of 2022 U/S 125 Cr.P.C. pending before Principal Judge, Family Court, Sitapur. (ii) That the parties have agreed that apart from mentioned case, if any other criminal/civil case(s) is pending between the parties or their family members with regard to the present dispute, both the parties shall get the same disposed off in terms of this Settlement Agreement. J) That it is also agreed between the parties that henceforth no case will be instituted by them against each other or any of their respective family members in future in the form of criminal or civil proceedings in respect of present dispute. K) That both the parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Settlement Agreement in strict sense. In case of any default, the party committing default shall be liable for playing fraud with the Court, hence for contempt of the Court.

7. By signing this Agreement the Parties hereto state that they have no claims or demands against each other with respect to APPLICATION U/s 482 No.9150 of 2023 (Jiyauddin Ansari Vs State of UP & Another) and all disputes and differences in this regard have been amicably settled by the Parties hereto through the process of Conciliation/Mediation."

6. It is stated that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the present proceedings are liable to be quashed.

7. 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 settlements between the parties 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. Accordingly, present applications are allowed in view of the settlement and the observations made hereinabove. Consequently, the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.71 of 2021 (Supra), indicated in the prayer, quoted above, are hereby quashed in view of settlement.

8. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 4.8.2025 Anand/- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench