Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:17961 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41203 of 2024 Applicant :- Vishal Gautam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Yadav,Rahul Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. The present application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 18.02.2024 as well as cognizance order dated 04.04.2024 along with all consequential orders and entire proceedings in Case Crime No.0177 of 2023, under Sections 498- A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District Mathura, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/ F.T.C. (Women Related Offence), Mathura. 2. On 10.01.2025, the following order was passed:- "After hearing the parties, this Court feels that once the matter of in-laws has already been dismissed by this Court, no interference in required, however, as the husband is here in this petition, therefore, in the interest of opposite party no.2 it would be appropriate to mediate between the parties. Thus, this Court directs the applicant Vishal Gautam and opposite party no.2 Kanishka Singh to appear before this Court on 06.02.2025. Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad, shall ensure presence of applicant Vishal Gautam before this Court on the next date fixed i.e. 06.02.2025. Senior Superintendent of Police, Mathura, shall ensure presence of opposite party no.2 Kanishka Singh before this Court on the next date fixed i.e. 06.02.2025. Learned counsel for the parties shall also ensure presence of the parties. Put up as fresh on 06.02.2025. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. Registrar (Compliance) shall look into compliance of this order. Learned Government Advocate shall also look into compliance of this order." 3. In compliance of aforesaid order dated 10.01.2025, applicant- Vishal Gautam (husband) and Smt. Kanishka Singh, opposite party no.2, are present before this Court and have been identified by their respective counsels, namely, Mr. Vipul Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. 4. Mr. Vishal Gautam states that he was informed about the Court's order regarding his appearance before the Court today and he has come along with S.I. Vipin Kumar, PNO-152291295, P.S. Crossing Republic, District- Ghaziabad. 5. On the earlier occasion, the Court had fixed the date for the purpose of mediation though in the order dated 10.01.2025 it has already been mentioned that the matter of in-laws had already been dismissed vide order dated 17.12.2024 passed in Application u/s 482 No.14516 of 2024 (Baburam Gautam And Another vs. State of U.P. and Another), thus, no interference is required. Since it is a matrimonial dispute, this Court had provided one opportunity to settle the matter. 6. The Court tried to mediate the matter between the parties but the parties are not ready to live as husband and wife and have decided to separate from each other. After deliberations, the applicant- husband is ready to give permanent alimony of Rs.25,00,000/- as against the demand raised by opposite party no.2 of Rs.50,00,000/-. On the aforesaid, the opposite party no.2 is not ready to settle the matter. 7. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the matter may be decided on merits. 8. Heard Mr. Vipul Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A.-I and Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned counsel for the State and perused the record. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first information report was lodged making false and baseless allegations. The marriage was performed without any dowry. The applicant has purchased the car in the name of opposite party no.2 and he has paid installments from time to time. After marriage, the applicant along with his wife (O.P. No.2) has started living at Bareilly. He further submits that the present case has been lodged by opposite party no.2 with false and frivolous allegations in order to exert pressure upon the applicant. He further submits that applicant has already been enlarged on bail. Referring to the facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. Learned counsel has referred following case laws:- (i) Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and others Vs. State of Bihar and others 2022 0 Supreme (SC) 117 (ii) Priyanka Mishra & Ors. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No.1545 of 2023) decided on 08.05.2023 (iii) Achin Gupta Vs. State of Haryana & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No.2379 of 2024, decided on 03.05.2024. (iv) Mohd. Ashraf and 7 others Vs. State of UP and Another 2024 LawSuit(All) 1090 10. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has opposed the application and submitted that in view of allegations made in the first information report and material collected during investigation, a prima-facie case is made out. The opposite party no.2 was harassed by her husband on account of dowry. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has placed reliance upon following case laws:- (i) Rupali Devi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. 2019 0 Supreme (SC) 420 (ii) Jagmohini Gupta and others Vs. State of U.P. and Another 2024 0 Supreme (All) 283 11. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the detailed order passed in the case of co-accused persons, i.e. order dated 17.12.2024 in Application u/s 482 No.14516 of 2024 (Baburam Gautam And Another vs. State of U.P. and Another), no interference is called for by this Court in the present case. 12. In view of the above, the application u/s 482 is dismissed. Interim protection granted to the applicant stands discharged. Order Date :- 6.2.2025 Rahul. Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad