Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30053 Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36072 of 2023 Applicant :- Adnan Khan And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jeeshan Ahmad Siddiqui,Kanhaiya Lal,Mohammed Iftekhar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rohit Kumar Singh Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Mohammed Iftekhar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri V.D.Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. 3. Sri Rohit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 is not present even in the revised list. 4. The records do not show that office has restored his vakalatnama in the records. 5. Office to restore the vakalatnama of Sri Rohit Kumar Singh, Advocate in the records and make a note in the order sheet about it. 6. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants Adnan Khan, Sageer Khan, Sajida Khan, Adil, Soni, Arif and Iqra Khan with the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 05.04.2022 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division)/F.T.C. Court No. 21, Allahabad in Complaint Case No. 2674 of 2021 (Tabassum Maqsood vs. Adnan Khan and others) under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Naini, District Prayagraj. 7. The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 27.09.2023 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably. 8. As per report of Mediation Centre dated 06.03.2024, the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them. 9. As per the office report dated 04.04.2024, a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record which states that mediation between the parties is successful. 10. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that parties have settled the dispute amicably before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and the the applicant no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 have decided to take Talaq and live separately, para- 7(a) and therefore the impugned proceedings/summoning order be quashed on the ground of settlement arrived at between the parties. 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 06.03.2024 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded and they have decided to take Talaq and live separately, 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 05.04.2022 and proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Manoj Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad