Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 446 (JHR)

Sweta Lal Burman @ Sweta v. State of Jharkhand

2022-04-12

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

body2022
JUDGMENT : 1. This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No.3374/ 2018 including the order dated 21.06.2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi whereby cognizance against the petitioner has been taken under sections 377, 323 and 506 I.P.C, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi. 2. Mr. A.K.Das, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the wife of O.P.no.2 and the case was filed by the O.P.no.2 who happens to be husband of the petitioner alleging therein that the O.P.No.2 was married to the petitioner on 22.4.2002 and at that time he was employed in Indian Air Force. He has alleged various allegations to malign the image of the petitioner to the extent that the petitioner is a lady of very unnatural behaviour and she has a lust for some unnatural sex. The complainant however admitted that out of the said wedlock they have blessed with two children. It has been alleged that the petitioner used to insert her finger or other object in the anus of the complainant during intercourse and also assaulted him with kicks. He has stated that he had retired from Indian Air Force in July, 2017 and thereafter it is alleged that he discovered the petitioner to be indulged in taking with other persons in audio/video chats and entire night she does so and even after restraining her to do so she continues the same on each night and also commit unnatural offences over her husband at early morning as after such chats she came to her husband in a aroused stated and insert her fingers in the anus of the complainant and she was biting, licking penis of the complainant against his will until he exhausted. He has further stated that on 15.06.2018, the petitioner administered some poison to the O.P.no.2 due to which he fell down and subsequently he vomited. It has been alleged that when he asked the petitioner about her extra marital life she threatened him and abused him and left the house on 19.06.2018 along with key of Almirah, Smart Cards, ATM Cards, UID, Vehicle Registration Card and Canteen Cards. It has been alleged that when he asked the petitioner about her extra marital life she threatened him and abused him and left the house on 19.06.2018 along with key of Almirah, Smart Cards, ATM Cards, UID, Vehicle Registration Card and Canteen Cards. Thereafter, he sent a legal notice on 29.06.2018 and 8.7.2018 the accused nos.1,3 and uncle of the accused no.1 came to his house to have a table talk and when the complainant demanded back the key of almirah, on 13.7.2018, accused no.1 had sent a person named Naren Ji along with documents to sign an application for mutual divorce to which the O.P.No.2 refused and thereafter he received a reply to the legal notice on 9.7.2018 wherein the allegations have been denied and on 27.7.2018 it is alleged that the accused persons came and threatened the complainant with filthy language. On 1.8.2018 the complainant broke the lock of Almirah and found that jewelleries, cloths et. Were stolen. On 5.8.2018 at about 11.30 am while the complainant and other family members were present all the accused persons except accused no.7 attacked the house of the complainant and assaulted him and snatched his gold chain from the neck of the complainant worth of Rs.10,000/-. He reported the matter to the police station but the police has not given weight to him and as such he filed the complaint case. 3. Mr. Das, the learned counsel for the petitioner further submits the petitioner has filed the case under section 498A of the IPC against the O.P.No.2 and in retaliation, the O.P.No.2 who happens to be husband of the petitioner has filed the case and the cognizance has been taken against the aforesaid sections of the I.P.C. He submits that now the parties have settled the dispute and divorce has already taken effect between the petitioner and the O.P.No.2 and this fact has been admitted by Mr. Anju Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the O.P.No.2 and both the counsels namely, Mr.Das, the learned counsel and Mr. Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the O.P.No.2 respectively jointly submit that a joint compromise petition has been filed wherein the terms and conditions of compromise has been given in paragraph no.5 of I.A No.2018/2022, wherein it has been settled as under: (i) The parties shall part their way by getting a decree of divorce. Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the O.P.No.2 respectively jointly submit that a joint compromise petition has been filed wherein the terms and conditions of compromise has been given in paragraph no.5 of I.A No.2018/2022, wherein it has been settled as under: (i) The parties shall part their way by getting a decree of divorce. (ii) Petition for divorce shall be filed within 15 days (iii) The daughter and son shall reside with the father and mother shall have the visiting rights. (iv) The husband shall pay Rupees eight lakhs as way of full and final settlement in form of alimony (in form as mentioned in the mediation report) (v) All the criminal case shall be withdrawn by the husband (vi) Divorce petition shall be filed before family court Jamshedpur (vii) Amount shall be paid in form of DD/Account transfers however not in cash (viii) Both parties shall venture to get the cases/suit disposed off as early as possible (ix) No further claims against each other besides the earlier decided (x) Proper receipt shall be issued by wife against the funds transferred (xi) Non compliance of the terms shall invite penalty upon both the parties (xii) Court expenses shall be borne by each others (xiii) Parties shall ensure compliance (xix) Since the NSCs are in joint name of the parties hence in case of encashing in the name of wife if and when required by the authorities of the dept., the husband will facilitate and do needful for the wife. (xv) Undertakes no further litigation of the said nature will be instituted. 4. Both the counsels have jointly submit that mutual divorce has been taken under section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act by way of mutual consent. 5. Mr. Azeemuddin, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent State submits that there is no societal interest involved in this petition and the Court can exercise the powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. 6. 4. Both the counsels have jointly submit that mutual divorce has been taken under section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act by way of mutual consent. 5. Mr. Azeemuddin, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent State submits that there is no societal interest involved in this petition and the Court can exercise the powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. 6. In view of the above fact and considering the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties including the compromise petition contained in the I.A petition in paragraph no.5 of the said I.A quoted hereinabove and also considering that there is no societal interest involved in this petition and the case is arising out of matrimonial dispute and the parties have already obtained divorce by mutual consent under section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act and in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. Versus State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 , and “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.” reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 , this is a fit case to exercise powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. 7. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No.3374/ 2018 including the order dated 21.06.2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi whereby cognizance against the petitioner has been taken under sections 377, 323 and 506 I.P.C, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi are quashed. 8. Cr.M.P. No. 2181 of 2019 stands allowed. 9. I.A No.2018/2022 stands disposed of.