Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2021 DIGILAW 210 (SC)

S K Hari v. State of Uttar Pradesh

2021-03-01

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, M.R.SHAH

body2021
ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad by an order dated 18 January 2020 dismissed an application, being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No 9471 of 2006, instituted under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. The relief which was sought before the High Court was to quash the charge-sheet which was submitted on 26 February 2005 and further proceedings in Case No 3584 of 2006 under Sections 498A, 323 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending before the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar. 3. The first appellant is the son of the second appellant. The first appellant is a Lieutenant Colonel in the Indian Army. The second appellant is about 73 years old. The first appellant and the second respondent got married on 4 December 2003. The marriage encountered difficulties. On 8 June 2005, the first appellant filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 for the restitution of conjugal rights in the Family Court at Secunderabad (OP 239/2005). On 19 July 2005, the second respondent lodged FIR No 169/05 at PS Kasna, Gautam Budh Nagar. After investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted on 26 February 2005. By an order dated 28 March 2006 the Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance. 4. The appellants instituted proceedings under section 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 (Criminal Miscellaneous Application No 9471 of 2006) for quashing the charge-sheet. The High Court issued notice and stayed coercive action by an interim order dated 18 August 2006. On a petition filed by the second respondent (HMA No 466 of 2005) before Civil Judge Senior Division, Gautam Budh Nagar, the marriage between the first appellant and the second respondent was dissolved by an order dated 30 October 2006. Since the decree for dissolution, the second respondent married in January 2008. The first appellant has married on 12 March 2009. 5. When these proceedings came up for hearing, we heard Mr P Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and Ms Neela Gokhale, learned counsel for the second respondent. Ms Sakshi Kakkar, learned counsel has appeared for the State of UP. 6. From the above narration of facts, it is evident that the parties have moved on in life. 5. When these proceedings came up for hearing, we heard Mr P Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and Ms Neela Gokhale, learned counsel for the second respondent. Ms Sakshi Kakkar, learned counsel has appeared for the State of UP. 6. From the above narration of facts, it is evident that the parties have moved on in life. Both of them have got married subsequent to the decree for dissolution passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Gautam Budh Nagar on 30 October 2006. 7. During the course of her submissions, Ms Neela Gokhale, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent fairly responded to the request, which has been made on behalf of the appellants by Mr P Vinay Kumar, learned counsel that at this point of time, it would be desirable in the interest of the parties that the entire matter is put to rest. Ms Gokhale, however, submitted that the second respondent has a claim as against the appellants in respect of her jewelry and other personal belongings, which according to her have not been returned. While this has been controverted on behalf of the appellants, Mr P Vinay Kumar stated that in the interest of resolving the dispute and ensuring peace between the appellants and the second respondent, a lump sum may be agreed upon to satisfy all the dues and outstanding claims of the second respondent. 8. Accordingly, it has been agreed between the appellants and the second respondent that the first appellant shall pay to the second respondent an amount of Rs 7 lakhs in full and final satisfaction of all the claims of the second respondent, including on account of her stridhan and personal belongings. The above amount shall be paid by way of a Demand Draft drawn in favour of the second respondent within a period of two weeks from today and shall be handed over to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent for onward transmission to the second respondent. Alternately, the payment may be made by an electronic transfer of funds to the bank account of the second respondent. 9. Having regard to the circumstances which have been narrated in the earlier part of this order, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served in pursuing the criminal prosecution any further. Alternately, the payment may be made by an electronic transfer of funds to the bank account of the second respondent. 9. Having regard to the circumstances which have been narrated in the earlier part of this order, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served in pursuing the criminal prosecution any further. Both the parties have since resettled in life and are not interested in further proceedings. Hence, in terms of the agreement which has been arrived at on the payment of a lump sum by the first appellant to the second respondent, we pass the following order: (i) The first appellant shall pay an amount of Rs 7 lakhs to the second respondent within a period of two weeks in full and final settlement of all demands and outstanding claims of the second respondent; (ii) A Demand Draft for the above amount shall be handed over to Ms Neela Gokhale, counsel for the second respondent for onward transmission to the second respondent; (iii) In the alternate to (ii) above, in the event the second respondent requests a direct transfer of funds into her account by electronic mode, the learned counsel for the second respondent shall provide to the learned counsel for the appellants full details of the bank account and other relevant details to facilitate the transfer of funds within the same period; (iv) Conditional on the payment of the amount as directed in (i) above, the present appeal shall stand allowed and the proceedings arising out of FIR No 169/2005 shall stand quashed and the charge-sheet and all proceedings consequent thereto, arising out of Case Crime No 215 of 2005 shall stand quashed; and (v) In the event that the first appellant fails to pay the amount to the second respondent, he shall lose the benefit of this order, in which event the order passed by the High Court shall continue to operate. 10. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 11. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.