Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 1329 (RAJ)

Nirmala Mantri v. State of Rajasthan

2005-05-05

N.K.JAIN

body2005
Judgment N. K. Jain, J.-Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for the complainant. 2. The petitioner as well as complainant are present in person. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits thatt both the parties have entered into compromise and as per terms of the compromise, both parties will submit an application for consent divorce before the Family Court wherein decree for consent divorce will be passed as per provisions of law after six months. They have further agreed that both the parties will give in writing before the Investigating Officer about compromise who will try to file final report in the matter. In case it is not possible, then the accused-petitioner will be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings for quashing the FIR wherein the complainant will say no objection for the same. The accused-petitioner will submit a bank draft of Rs. 7 lakhs in the name of complainant Smt. Kritika Sharma alongwith the application for consent divorce before the Family Court. The said demand draft will remain in deposit with the Family Court and will be given to Smt. Kritika only after passing consent decree in favour of husband namely, Shri Sudhir Mantri. They have also drafted an agreement about the aforesaid terms of compromise duly signed by mother of the husband as well as Kritika Sharma. Smt. Nirmala Mantri will submit the demand draft of the aforesaid amount in place of cheque as mentioned in the agreement. 4. Both the parties further submit that a divorce petitioner is already pending in between shri Sudhir Mantri and Smt. Kritika and they may be given liberty to file an application in the said petition itself for treating the said petition as consent petition for divorce under Section. 13-B of he Hindu Marriage Act. It will be open for them to file the said application. In case it is filed, the Family Court is directed to entertain the application and keep the demand draft of Rs.7 lakhs in the name of Smt. Kritika Sharma in Court and may hand-over the same after passing of the decree for consent divorce in between them. Both the parties have agreed that Smt. Kritika Sharma will not raise any dispute about any type of maintenance in future from the husband. 5. Both the parties have agreed that Smt. Kritika Sharma will not raise any dispute about any type of maintenance in future from the husband. 5. The original copy of the agreement has been taken on record in this file, which is subject to further terms and conditions of this order, which has been passed with consent of both the parties in their presence and their respective Counsel. 6. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I allow this bail application under Section 438. CrPC. .7. Therefore, the SHO/I.O. of Mahila Police Station South, Jaipur is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Smt. Nirmala Mantri in FIR No. 17/2005, registered under Sections 498-A, 406 and 313, IPC, he shall enlarge her on bail provided she furnishes personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one surety of in the like amount to his satisfaction on the following conditions :- .(i) She shall make themselves available for interrogation by I.O. as and when requires; .(ii) She shall not, directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer; (iii) She shall not, leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (iv) If Smt. Nirmala Mantri or Sudhir Mantri does not produce the demand draft as directed above, then it will be open for smt. Kritika to file application for cancellation of this bail order. Similarly, if Smt. Kritika raises any objection about the passing of the consent decree of divorce of for quashing of FIR, if necessity so arises, then the said amount of Rs. 7 lakhs will not be paid by the Family Court to Smt. Kritika and will be handed over back to Smt. Nirmala Mantri or Shri Sudhir Mantri. If there is any breach of terms and conditions agreed in between the parties, then the aggrieved party will be at liberty to move appropriate application before this Court.