Allahabad High Court
Aayush Sharma Alias Aayush Kumar And 4 ... vs State Of U.P. And Another on 8 July, 2025
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:108218 Court No. - 64 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43884 of 2024 Applicant :- Aayush Sharma Alias Aayush Kumar And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Vishal Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.
3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants, namely, Aayush Sharma alias Aayush Kumar, Smt. Rajrani Sharma, Rajendra Kumar, Anjali Sharma and Yash Sharma with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 48 of 2024 (Old No. 2071 of 2023) CNR No. UPSL060068882023, Registration No. 3215 of 2023 (Kalpana Sharma vs. Aayush Sharma & others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Baniyather, District Sambhal as well as impugned summoning order dated 26.02.2024 passed / issued by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate Sambhal Situated at Chandausi.
4. Vide order dated 08.01.2025, notice was issued to the opposite party no. 2 by this Court.
5. As per office report dated 07.07.2025, notice has been served on the opposite party no. 2 personally, despite service of notice, no one appears on his behalf before this Court even in the revised list.
6. The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 08.01.2025 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.
7. As per report of Mediation Centre dated 10.04.2025, the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.
8. As per the office report dated 07.07.2025, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record which states that mediation between the parties is successful.
9. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that parties have settled the dispute amicably before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and the applicant no. 1(husband) and the opposite party no. 2(wife) have decided to live separately and dissolve their relationship as husband and wife in this regard they have filed a petition u/s 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sambhal at Chandausi and therefore the impugned proceedings/summoning order be quashed on the ground of settlement arrived at between the parties.
10. Learned counsel for the applicants further states that a case under Section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act is pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sambhal at Chandausi as Divorce Petition. Learned counsel assures that the applicants shall abide by all the terms and conditions of settlement agreement arrived at between the parties before the mediation centre of this Court and shall fully co-operate with expeditious disposal of the said case pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court Sambhal at Chandausi. He prayed that a direction for expeditious disposal of the same be given.
11. From perusal of the report of Mediation Centre of this Court, it appears that in pursuance of the said order the mediation proceedings were taken up which ended in a settlement dated 10.03.2025 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded and they have decided to live separately and dissolve their marriage, para-7(a). The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising in the present matter. The parties have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them, the said fact is mentioned in para 7(e) of the said mediation report.
12. Learned State counsel could not dispute the factum of compromise between the parties which is on record.
13. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.
14. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings/summoning order as prayed for by the applicants.
15. The present application is allowed.
16. The impugned summoning order dated 26.02.2024 and proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.
17. However the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sambhal at Chandausi is directed to expedite the hearing of the said case and decide the same within 60 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Manoj (Samit Gopal,J.)