Allahabad High Court
Balram @ Raju vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home And ... on 6 March, 2025
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13826 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 384 of 2024 Applicant :- Balram @ Raju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Yadav,Shiv Bhagwan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramakar Shukla Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record.
2. The present application has been filed by the applicant for the following main relief(s):-
"(i) To quash the impugned summoning order dated 25.06.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 27, Sultanpur, in a very illegal and arbitrary manner Under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., and 3, & 4 of Divorce Prohibition Act, 1961 Police Station- Haliyapur, District- Sultanpur, in Criminal Case No. 307 of 2021 (State versus Balram @ Raju and others), as contained in Annexure No. 1, in the interest of justice.
(ii) To Quash the charge sheet dated 22.02.2021 and the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 307 of 2021 (State versus Balram @ Raju and others) arising out of Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 09/2021, Under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., and 3, & 4 of Divorce Prohibition Act, 1961 Police Station- Haliyapur, District-Sultanpur, as contained in Annexure No. 3, in the interest of justice.
(iii) To quash the recovery warrant dated 30.11.2023 issued in Criminal Misc. Case No. 373/2023 "Parvati @Guddan and Another Versus Balram @ Raju," and as well as the entire proceedings of the Criminal Misc. Case No. 373/2023 "Parvati @ Guddan and Another Versus Balram @ Raju" under section 128 of Cr.P.C., as contained in Annexure No. 2, in the interest of justice."
3. It appears that on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court vide its order dated 15.02.2024 referred the matter to Mediation Centre of this Court so as to carve out possibility of amicable settlement of dispute between the parties.
4. It also appears that in compliance of order of this Court dated 15.02.2024, a SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT has been entered into between the parties on 02.08.2024 thereby indicating that the parties were present and they have admitted that they have entered into an agreement voluntarily.
5. The relevant contents of the SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT are extracted hereunder:-
"6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:-
A. That both the parties namely Balram @ Raju (First Party/husband) and Parvati @ Guddan (Second Party/wife) have mutually agreed to dissolve their marriage and to live separately in future. For the purpose of dissolution of their marriage the parties have filed a petition for divorce with mutual consent U/S 13-B Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before Family Court, Sultanpur bearing Matrimonial Case No. 851 of 2024. Both the parties herein undertake to appear before the concerned Court on the date(s) fixed and would make their earnest endeavour to obtain a decree of divorce in terms of this settlement at the earliest.
B. That the First Party has agreed to pay to the Second Party and the Second Party has agreed to receive from the First Party a total sum of Rs. 8,25,000/- (Eight Lacs Twenty Five Thousand only) towards one time full and final settlement of all the claims of the Second Party against First Party including the claim for permanent alimony and amount for maintenance as well as welfare of their daughter namely Laxmi aged about 8 (eight years).
C. That both the parties agree that the aforementioned amount Rs.8,25,000/- (Eight Lacs Twenty Five Thousand only) would be paid to the Second Party/wife in two installments through Demand Drafts drawn in favour of Parvati. The first installment of Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lacs only) will be paid by the First Party/husband to the Second Party/wife on the date of entering into settlement agreement before Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Allahabad High Court, Lucknow. The second installment of of Rs. 2,25,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand only) will be paid by the First Party/husband to the Second Party/wife at the time of final motion of the joint petition filed Under Section 13-B, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before Family Court, Sultanpur bearing Matrimonial Case No. 851 of 2024.
D. That the parties have agreed that the custody of their daughter-Laxmi aged about 8 (Eight) years shall remain with the Second Party.
E. That the First Party has handed over two Demand Drafts to the Second Party of the total amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lacs only) today i.e. 02.08.2024 towards aforesaid first installment. The details of the Demand Drafts are mentioned hereunder.
(1) D. D. No. 009746 dated 31.05.2024 amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/-(One Lac only) in favour of Parvati drawn on Bank of Baroda.
(II) D. D. No.143012 dated 11.07.2024 amounting to Rs. 5,00,000/-(Five Lacs only) in favour of Parvati drawn on Bank of Baroda.
F. That the parties have agreed to withdraw/not pursue the cases filed against each other. The details of the cases are mentioned hereinunder:
(I) Criminal Case No.307 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime/FIR No.09 of 2021 U/Ss 498-A, 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P. S. Haliyapur, District-Sultanpur pending before Ld. Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 27, Sultanpur.
(II) Criminal Misc. Case No.373 of 2023 U/S 128 Cr. P.C. pending before Family Court, Sultanpur arising out of Criminal Case No. 1163 of 2019 U/S 125 Cr. P.C..
G. That the Second Party has agreed that she shall not have any objection if the Hon'ble Court decides the APPLICATION U/s 482 No.384 of 2024 (Balram @ Raju Vs State of U.P & Another) filed against the proceedings of Criminal Misc. Case No.373 of 2023 U/S 128 Cr.P.C. and Criminal Case No.307 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime/FIR No.09 of 2021 U/Ss 498-A, 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Haliyapur, District-Sultanpur in terms of this settlement agreement.
H- In addition to above mentioned cases, if any other case(s) is pending between the parties, both the parties shall not have any objection if the said case(s) is also disposed of by the Hon'ble Court in terms of this Settlement Agreement.
I- 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 their marriage or any matter incidental thereto.
J- 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. The Second Party has agreed that in case she fails to cooperate in the divorce proceedings, she shall be bound to return to the First Party the entire money received by her from the First Party along with interest @9% p.a. with effect from the date of receipt of the amount/installment(s) and till the date of its actual payment to the First Party. The First Party has agreed that in case he fails to attend and cooperate in the divorce case, the amount received by the Second Party from the First Party shall not be returned by the Second Party and the Second Party shall be at liberty to reopen her case(s) decided by the Hon'ble Court in terms of this Settlement Agreement by moving an appropriate application before competent Court Forum."
6. 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 application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings arising out of Criminal Case No. 307 of 2021, quoted above, are hereby quashed qua the applicant.
7. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.
Order Date :-06.03.2025 Jyoti/-