Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 157993 (ALL)

MO. HALIM @ HALIM AND OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. CIVIL SECTT. LKO. AND OTHERS

/7558/2025 · 2025-09-23

Rajeev Singh, Rajnish Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7558 of 2025 Court No. - 10 HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Case called out. 2. None is present on behalf of the petitioners whereas Ms. Soumya Dixit, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State are present. 3. This Court had passed the following order on 09.09.2025:- "1.Heard Shri Sanjay Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Girjesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Ms. Soumya Dixit, learned counsel, who has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party No.4 and filed Vakalatnama on her behalf. The same is taken on record. 2.By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the impugned First Information Report dated 26.07.2025 (in short F.I.R.) bearing FIR/Case Crime No.0408 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 85 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Dewa, District-Barabanki, as contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the impugned F.I.R. is an outcome of matrimonial dispute and this dispute may be settled Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sanjay Kumar Verma, Pramod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Pratyush Rawat, Soumya Dixit Mo. Halim @ Halim And Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) amicably through mediation in the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court, therefore, the matter may be referred to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court. 4.Learned counsel for the petitioners, so as to show bonafide of the petitioner No.1 who is husband of the opposite party No.4 (Smt. Yasmeen), has stated that he is really willing to settle the dispute amicably through mediation and, as such, he is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- which may be given to the opposite party No.4. 5.It is trite law on the point that without seeking consent of the parties concerned, the matter may not be sent to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre for mediation, therefore, on the next date the opposite party No.4 shall appear in person to apprise the Court as to whether she is also willing to settle the dispute amicably through mediation. 6.List this case on 23.09.2025. On that date, the petitioner No.1 (Mohd. Halim @ Hlim) and the opposite party No.4 (Smt. Yasmeen) shall appear in person before this Court to apprise the Court as to whether they are willing to settle their dispute amicably through mediation. 7.On the next date, the petitioner No.1 shall produce a demand draft before the Court to the tune of Rs.50,000/- in the name of opposite party No.4 (Smt. Yasmeen). 8.Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be adopted against the present petitioners pursuant to the impugned F.I.R.. 9.It is made clear that if the demand draft of the aforesaid amount is not produced by the petitioner No.1 before the Court, the benefit of this order shall not be made available to the present petitioners. 10.Since Ms. Soumya Dixit, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party No.4, therefore, Ms. Dixit shall ensure the presence of opposite party No.4 before this Court on the date fixed. 11.When the case is next listed, name of Ms. Soumya Dixit, Advocate be printed in the cause list as counsel for the opposite parties. " CRLP No. 7558 of 2025 2 3. In deference to the order dated 09.09.2025, the respondent No.4 : Smt. Yasmeen is present in person before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.4 submits that since none is present on behalf of the petitioners today, therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for any protection. 5. The order dated 09.09.2025 passed by this Court has not been complied with. The petition is dismissed for non prosecution. 6. Interim order, granted earlier, is hereby vacated. The Investigating Officer is directed to complete the investigation expeditiously and submit a report to the concerned Court in accordance with law. September 23, 2025 Saurabh CRLP No. 7558 of 2025 3 (Rajeev Singh,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench