Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18281 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt. Usha Sahani And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Narayan Singh,Shiv Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Krishna Gopal
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh and Sri Shiv Prakash, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Krishna Gopal, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the Charge Sheet No.359 of 2018 dated 09.12.2018, congnizance/summoning order 11.03.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case no. 1271 of 2019 (State Vs. Paras Sahani and Others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Prem Nagar, District Bareilly pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.2 Bareilly.
On 07.05.209, following order was passed:
"Heard Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh,learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to stay/quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1271 of 2019 (State v. Paras Sahani and others) under section 498A, 504,323,406 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station- Prem Nagar, District- Bareilly arising out of Case Crime No. 559 of 2018, in Charge Sheet No. 359 of 2018 dated 9.12.2018 and further be pleased to quash the cognizance/summoning order dated 11.3.2019 passed by the ACJM, Court No. 2, Bareilly.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits that there are good chances of mediation between the parties and if one opportunity is given, there is every likelihood that the matrimonial dispute may be resolved resulting in closure/ compounding of the proceedings.
Having considered the arguments advanced across the Bar, I have a feeling that Court owes a duty to the society to strain to the utmost to repair the frayed relations between the parties so that the wounded situation may e healed into a healthy rapprochement. The matter in hand also appears to be one of those case in which reconciliation should be tried between the disputing parties.
In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the matter is referred to the Mediation Centre with the direction that same may be tried to be resolved after giving notices to both the parties. I hereby direct the applicant to deposit a sum of Rs. 20,000/- within two weeks from today with the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court of which 90% shall be paid to the opposite party no. 2 on the very first day for appearance before the Mediation Centre.
It is directed that Medication Centre shall decide the matter expeditiously preferably within a period of three month. Thereafter, the case shall be listed before appropriate Bench on 3rd September, 2019.
Till the next date of listing, further proceedings against the applicants in the aforesaid case shall be kept in abeyance.
After depositing the amount, aforesaid, notice shall be issued to the parties and in case the aforesaid amount is not deposited within the aforesaid period, the interim protection granted above shall automatically be vacated."
Thereafter a settlement agreement was arrived at between the parties on 07.02.2020 on the following terms and conditions:
"7. In view of the Interim Settlement Agreement dated 13.12.2019. The following settlement has been arrived at between the parties hereto:-
a) That the parties have settled their dispute and decided take mutually divorce and it this regard they have filed a petition u/s 13-B of the Hindu Marriage act before the Family Court, Bareilly which is registered as Petition No.02 of 2020. The certified copy of aforesaid divorce petition is being annexed to this settlement-agreement for king perusal of the Hon'ble Court.
b) That the parties have settled their dispute on the condition that the applicant-husband shall pay a permanent alimony including Stridhan of Rs.13,10,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Ten Thousand only) to the wife Harshita Arora.
c) That the demand draft bearing no.768827 dated 29.11.2019 for Rs.6,55,000/-(Rupees Six Lakhs Fifty Five Thousand only) drawn on Punjab National Bank in favour of wife namely Harshita Arora and which has been handed over to the wife O.P. No.2 today ie. 07.02.2020 by the applicant-husband and she has acknowledge the receipt of the same.
d) That the remaining amount i.e. Rs.6,55,000/- shall be paid by the husband to the wife through demand draft at the time of final decree of the mutual divorce petition in Family Court, Bareilly.
e) That it has been agreed between the parties that the all criminal and civil cases filed by them against each other shall be withdrawn/get quashed by them by taking appropriate steps before the Court/Authorities concerned n view of this settlement-agreement.
f) That thereafter parties have no further claim against each other in any manner whatsoever regarding present matrimonial dispute.
g) That it has been agreed between the parties that they shall not violate the terms and conditions of this settlement, otherwise the aggrieved party will be free to take legal course."
Accordingly, in terms of the settlement agreement arrived at between the parties, the parties have amicably settled the dispute.
This Court is not unmindful of the following judgments of the Apex Court:
a) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003) 4 SCC 675;
b) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677;
c) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1;
d) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303;
e) Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; (2014) 6 SCC 466;
In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non-compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278, in which the law expounded by the Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the Charge Sheet No.359 of 2018 dated 09.12.2018, congnizance/summoning order 11.03.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case no. 1271 of 2019 (State Vs. Paras Sahani and Others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Prem Nagar, District Bareilly pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.2 Bareilly., is hereby quashed.
This Application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 6.1.2021 N Tiwari