Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23384 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20069 of 2016 Applicant :- Sanjay Nigam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Ors Counsel for Applicant :- B.S. Pandey,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- A R Yadav,G.A. With Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13697 of 2016 Applicant :- Snehlata Nigam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- B.S. Pandey,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. With Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24180 of 2015 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Nigam And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another With Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28356 of 2015 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Nigam And 4 Ors. Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. The present matter pertains to matrimonial disputes between family members and relatives. Therefore, all these applications are being disposed of by a common judgment/order. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, the learned counsel for the opposite parties, and perused the compromise affidavits filed in this matter. 3. The present applications, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., have been filed seeking the quashing of the following criminal proceedings pending before the learned trial court, based on the compromise entered into between the parties: (a) Charge sheet and cognizance order dated 17.03.2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 72 of 2015, under Sections 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Mahila Thana Urai, District Jalaun, in Application U/S 482 Nos. 20069 of 2016 & 13697 of 2016; (b) Charge sheet dated 24.12.2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 470 of 2014, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC & 3/4 of the D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Kannauj, in Application U/S 482 No. 24180 of 2015; and (c) Charge sheet dated 26.12.2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 653 of 2014, under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC & 3/4 of the D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Kannauj. 4. During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties were directed to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court in Transfer Application (Civil) No. 543 of 2015, by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 25.11.2016, and on 09.03.2017, the matrimonial disputes between the parties, who are family members, were amicably resolved, with the settlement being recorded in the following terms: "a) That the marriage of Snehlata Nigam (applicant-wife) and Rajesh Nigam (Opposite Party-husband) was solemnized on 31.05.2010. Out of aforesaid wedlock the parties have no issue. b) That Snehlata Nigam (applicant-wife) and Rajesh Nigam (Opposite Party- husband) have decided to take mutual divorce on the condition that the husband shall pay a permanent alimony of Rs. 5,00,000/- (rupees five lacs only) to the wife by way of demand draft drawn in favour of Smt. Snehlata Nigam, in two equal installments of Rs. 2,50,000/- each. c) That today i.e. 09.03.2017, the husband has produced a demand draft bearing no. 385694 dated 02.03.2017 for Rs. 2,50,000/- drawn on Bank of Baroda which is being retained at the Mediation Centre and shall be handed over to the wife at the time of final settlement when they shall appear again before the Centre with certified copy of the divorce petition filed u/s 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. d) That it has been agreed between the parties that they shall file a mutual divorce petition u/s 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Orai at Jalaun before 23rd March, 2017 as wife (applicant) is permanently residing there and she has no objection. e) That it has been agreed between the parties that the rest amount i.e. Rs. 2,50,000/- of the total agreed alimony shall be paid by the husband to the wife at the time of recording the statement (at the time of second motion) in the divorce petition before the Family Court, Orai at Jalaun. f) That it has also been agreed between the parties that all the cases filed by them against each other shall remain in abeyance for this intervening period." 5. Learned counsel for the parties submit that, since the disputes stemmed from matrimonial discord and the parties have now settled their differences amicably, continuing with the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. It is further submitted that the opposite parties to the respective applications have no objection to the quashing of the proceedings, and the settlement was voluntarily entered into without any coercion or undue influence. 6. The Supreme Court, in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, held that in cases arising from matrimonial disputes, where the parties have amicably settled their differences, the High Court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings, provided the matter does not involve heinous offences or crimes against society at large. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offences, the fact that the disputes arose out matrimonial discord, and that the parties have voluntarily settled their differences, no useful purpose would be served by continuing with the criminal proceedings. 8. In view of the above, and in the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the entire criminal proceedings in the aforementioned cases mentioned in para 3 are hereby quashed in accordance with the compromise arrived at between the parties. 9. The applications are accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 17.2.2025 Anil K. Sharma Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad