State v. Pushpendra Pratap Singh and Ors. arising out of FIR

"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the chargesheet dated 09.07.2023 filed by the Investigating OfÏcer in FIR/Case Crime No. 374/2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 342, 406, 506 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Pratapgarh and summoning order dated 30.09.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh in Criminal Case No. 8914/2023, State vs. Pushpendra Pratap Singh and Ors. arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 374/2023 under Sections 498-A, 323, 342, 406, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Pratapgarh contained in Annexure No. 1 and 2 to this petition. This Hon'ble Court further be pleased to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 8914/2023, State vs. Pushpendra Pratap Singh and Ors. arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 374/2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 342, 406, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Pratapgarh which is pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Pratapgarh." It appears that on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide its order dated 05.07.2024 referred the matter to Mediation Centre of this Court so as to carve out possibility of amicable settlement of dispute between the parties. The same is quoted hereinbelow:- "Heard. The present application has been filed for setting aside the charge sheet dated 09.07.2023 and impugned summoning order dated 30.09.2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 374 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 342, 406, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, at Police Station - Kotwali City, District - Pratapgarh. It is stated by learned Counsel for the applicant 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 applicants would deposit Rs. 35,000/- before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court within one week from today. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the applicants including that dispute between the parties can be settled amicably by way of mediation, this Court finds that the matter requires consideration. Issue notice to the opposite party No. 2. Steps to be taken within seven working days. Taking note of the aforesaid, let the matter be placed before Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on 25.07.2024. The applicants shall deposit an amount of Rs. 35,000/- 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/Smt. Pratima Singh. List/put up this case before this Court on 20.08.2024 as fresh along with mediation report. Till the next date of listing, the proceedings in issue against the applicants shall be kept in abeyance. In case, the amount aforesaid is not deposited by the applicants within the specified time, the interim protection granted by this Court shall not be available to applicants. 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." It also appears that in compliance of order of this Court dated 05.07.2024, a SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT has entered into between applicant/husband and opposite party No. 2/wife on 17.03.2025. The Mediation and Conciliation Centre has sent its report along with the settlement agreement, which is on the record. 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 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. 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 applicants. OfÏce/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 Nitesh NITESH KUMAR TEWARY 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 chargesheet dated 09.07.2023 filed by the Investigating OfÏcer in FIR/Case Crime No. 374/2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 342, 406, 506 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Pratapgarh and summoning order dated 30.09.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh in Criminal Case No. 8914/2023, State vs. Pushpendra Pratap Singh and Ors. arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 374/2023 under Sections 498-A, 323, 342, 406, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Pratapgarh contained in Annexure No. 1 and 2 to this petition. This Hon'ble Court further be pleased to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 8914/2023, State vs. Pushpendra Pratap Singh and Ors. arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 374/2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 342, 406, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Pratapgarh which is pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Pratapgarh." It appears that on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide its order dated 05.07.2024 referred the matter to Mediation Centre of this Court so as to carve out possibility of amicable settlement of dispute between the parties. The same is quoted hereinbelow:- "Heard. The present application has been filed for setting aside the charge sheet dated 09.07.2023 and impugned summoning order dated 30.09.2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 374 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 342, 406, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, at Police Station - Kotwali City, District - Pratapgarh. It is stated by learned Counsel for the applicant 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 applicants would deposit Rs. 35,000/- before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court within one week from today. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the applicants including that dispute between the parties can be settled amicably by way of mediation, this Court finds that the matter requires consideration. Issue notice to the opposite party No. 2. Steps to be taken within seven working days. Taking note of the aforesaid, let the matter be placed before Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court on 25.07.2024. The applicants shall deposit an amount of Rs. 35,000/- 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/Smt. Pratima Singh. List/put up this case before this Court on 20.08.2024 as fresh along with mediation report. Till the next date of listing, the proceedings in issue against the applicants shall be kept in abeyance. In case, the amount aforesaid is not deposited by the applicants within the specified time, the interim protection granted by this Court shall not be available to applicants. 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." It also appears that in compliance of order of this Court dated 05.07.2024, a SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT has entered into between applicant/husband and opposite party No. 2/wife on 17.03.2025. The Mediation and Conciliation Centre has sent its report along with the settlement agreement, which is on the record. 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 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. 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 applicants. OfÏce/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 Nitesh NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench