Ehshan Mohammad And Ors v. State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And Anr

3. Both the parties are present before this Court and have been identified by their respective counsel.

4. Indisputably, the dispute between the parties has been settled, as appears from Annexure -D to the report of Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court. Paragraph nos.6 and 7 of the settlement between the parties read as under :- "6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto: 2 A482 No. 7384 of 2016 A) That both the parties have agreed to settle all their dispute unconditionally and have agreed that they shall withdraw/not pursue the cases filed against each other and their family members. The details of the cases are mentioned hereunder: (a) Compliant Case No.2399 of 2016 (Taufeeq Vs. Ehsan Mohdmmad and Others) USs 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. Police Station-Mohammadi, District-Kheri pending in the Court of ACJM, Mohammadi Khiri. (b) Complaint Case No.2937 of 2014 (Ehsaan Mohammad Vs. Tasleem and Others) U/S 406 IPC and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, P. S. Roza, pending in the Court of ACJ (Je. Division- III)/J. M Shahjahanpur. B) That the First Party has agreed to withdraw his case mentioned in Para 6. A (b) within 10 (ten) day from today. C) That the Second Party has agreed that she will have no objection if the Hon'ble Court decides the APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 7384 of 2016 (Ehshan Mohammad & Others Vs State of UP & Another) in terms of this settlement agreement. D) In addition to above mentioned case, if any other case(s) is pending between the parties, but the parties shall not have any objection if the case(s) is disposed of by the Hon'ble Court in terms of this Settlement Agreement. E) 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 any dispute arising out of present dispute or any matter incidental thereto. F) That both the parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Settlement in strict sense. In case of any default, the party committing the 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 further claims or demands against each other with respect to the matter involved in APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 7384 of 2016 (Ehshan Mohammad & Others Vs State of U.P & Another) and all disputes and difference in this regard have been amicably settled by the parties hereto through the process of Conciliation/Mediation."

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

6. Considering the aforesaid including the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties and the nature of dispute/crime as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others 3 A482 No. 7384 of 2016 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, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, present application is allowed in view of the settlement and the observations made hereinabove. Consequently, the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.2399/2016 (Supra), indicated in the prayer, quoted above, are hereby quashed in view of settlement.

7. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. September 3, 2025 Anand/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

3. Both the parties are present before this Court and have been identified by their respective counsel.

4. Indisputably, the dispute between the parties has been settled, as appears from Annexure -D to the report of Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court. Paragraph nos.6 and 7 of the settlement between the parties read as under :- "6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto: 2 A482 No. 7384 of 2016 A) That both the parties have agreed to settle all their dispute unconditionally and have agreed that they shall withdraw/not pursue the cases filed against each other and their family members. The details of the cases are mentioned hereunder: (a) Compliant Case No.2399 of 2016 (Taufeeq Vs. Ehsan Mohdmmad and Others) USs 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. Police Station-Mohammadi, District-Kheri pending in the Court of ACJM, Mohammadi Khiri. (b) Complaint Case No.2937 of 2014 (Ehsaan Mohammad Vs. Tasleem and Others) U/S 406 IPC and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, P. S. Roza, pending in the Court of ACJ (Je. Division- III)/J. M Shahjahanpur. B) That the First Party has agreed to withdraw his case mentioned in Para 6. A (b) within 10 (ten) day from today. C) That the Second Party has agreed that she will have no objection if the Hon'ble Court decides the APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 7384 of 2016 (Ehshan Mohammad & Others Vs State of UP & Another) in terms of this settlement agreement. D) In addition to above mentioned case, if any other case(s) is pending between the parties, but the parties shall not have any objection if the case(s) is disposed of by the Hon'ble Court in terms of this Settlement Agreement. E) 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 any dispute arising out of present dispute or any matter incidental thereto. F) That both the parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of this Settlement in strict sense. In case of any default, the party committing the 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 further claims or demands against each other with respect to the matter involved in APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 7384 of 2016 (Ehshan Mohammad & Others Vs State of U.P & Another) and all disputes and difference in this regard have been amicably settled by the parties hereto through the process of Conciliation/Mediation."

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

6. Considering the aforesaid including the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties and the nature of dispute/crime as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others 3 A482 No. 7384 of 2016 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, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, present application is allowed in view of the settlement and the observations made hereinabove. Consequently, the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.2399/2016 (Supra), indicated in the prayer, quoted above, are hereby quashed in view of settlement.

7. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. September 3, 2025 Anand/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench