Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 674 (UTT)

Himal Tewari v. State of Uttarakhand

2023-12-12

RAKESH THAPLIYAL

body2023
JUDGMENT : 1. All the applicants and respondent No. 2 appeared through V.C. and this Court interacted with each of the applicants and respondent No. 2 and all of them are also identified by their respective counsels. 2. By the instant Application, preferred under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the applicants are challenging the Charge-Sheet No. 102/2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, along with the summoning/cognizance order dated 14.02.2023. Apart from this, the present applicants are also challenging the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 492 of 2023 State vs. Himal Tewari and others. 3. The instant Application, preferred under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is supported with the Compounding Application and the Compounding Application is also supported with the affidavits of each of the applicants and respondent No. 2. 4. Applicant No. 1 married with respondent No. 2 in the year 2002 and since there were some differences between them, consequently, a First Information Report was lodged by respondent No. 2 bearing FIR No. 118 of 2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, and 504 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Several matrimonial disputes arose between the applicants and respondent No. 2, and due to these differences, ultimately the matter went to the Supreme Court, and two SLPs being SLP(C) Nos. 19266/2012 and 20200/2012 were preferred by respondent No. 2 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, wherein on 12.02.2023, the following interim order was passed- “The parties are present in person. They are not averse to exploring the possibilities of an amicable settlement. They submit that in order to create an ideal atmosphere conducive for such a settlement proceedings in all pending matters between the parties could be stayed for a limited period. A list of proceedings pending in different courts between the parties has been placed, which include the following : 1. Petition under Section 125 Criminal Procedure Code, pending in the court of Shri K.S. Mohi, Judge, Family Court, Saket, New Delhi - titled as -Rupali Tewari vs. Himal Tewari - CC No. 51/2011. 2. Petition under Section 13 (1) (1a), Hindu Marriage Act, filed by Himal Tewari, pending in the court of District Judge, Gurgaon - titled as - Himal Tewari vs. Rupali Tewari - HMA 540/2011. 3. 2. Petition under Section 13 (1) (1a), Hindu Marriage Act, filed by Himal Tewari, pending in the court of District Judge, Gurgaon - titled as - Himal Tewari vs. Rupali Tewari - HMA 540/2011. 3. Guardianship Petition No. 27/2011, pending in the court of District Judge, Gurgaon - titled as - Himal Tewari vs. Rupali Tewari. 4. Suit for declaration for Permanent and Mandatory Injunction - titled as - Himal Tewari vs. Rupali Tewari - CS No. 379/2011. 5. COCCP P No. 1880/2012 in Cr. No. 3709/2012, pending before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana - titled as - Himal Tewari vs. Rupali Tewari. 6. COCCP P No. 1833/2012 in Cr. No. 3309/2012, pending before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana- titled as - Himal Tewari vs. Rupali Tewari. 7. Execution Petition arising out of Guardianship Petition No. 27/2011, - titled as - Himal Tewari vs. Rupali Tewari, Gurgaon. 8. FIR No. 118/2008, under Section 498-A/406, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Nehru Colony, Dehradoon, Uttrakhand. In view of the submissions made at the Bar and the willingness of the parties to attempt an amicable settlement, we direct that further proceedings in all the aforementioned cases shall remain stayed till 8.3.2013. List on 8.3.2013 [Friday] at 3.30 p.m.” 5. As it appears from the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 12.02.2013 there are total eight case pending in different Courts. Thereafter, a settlement was arrived between applicant No. 1 and respondent No. 2 at Gurgaon, Haryana on 06.01.2014. This settlement was arrived with the following terms:- “1. That party of the First Part in order to secure the party of the Second Part agrees to transfer his share in the property bearing Flat No. D-22, Ground Floor, Suncity Township, Sector-54, Gurgaon, Haryana in favour of party of the Second Part and undertakes to bear the expenses as would be required to effect the said transfer. 2. That the party of the First Part further agrees to pay household expenses presently @ Rs. 50,000/-per month (needless to say that the same is liable to be revised as per the inflation and income of the party of the First Part), to the party of the Second Part towards household expenses on or before 7th day of every month. 3. That the first party will take care of all financial expenses for education and upbringing of the child –Diya. 4. 3. That the first party will take care of all financial expenses for education and upbringing of the child –Diya. 4. That one set of the party of the Second Part is lying with her mother in-law and some parts of istridhan have been sold due to compelling circumstances; however, the party of the First Part undertakes that in lieu thereof, he will reconstruct the jewellery for the party of the Second Part which she has lost or had to be sold. 5. That the party of the First Part has got an employment opportunity at Mumbai and considering the welfare of the minor the party of the Second Part has given notice to her employers to shift to Mumbai (subject to Diya getting admission in a school, equivalent to her present standard of school preferably in South Mumbai) and the Party of the First Part therefore volunteers to pay towards her personal expenses a sum of Rs. 45,000/- per month to the party of the Second Part, till she regains employment at least equivalent to her present salary i.e. Rs. 7.5 Lakhs per annum, in case the party of the Second Part does not get an equivalent employment, the party of the First Part shall pay the amount falling short of Rs. 45,000/- to the party of the Second Part. 6. That it has been mutually agreed between the parties that both will not put the minor child-Diya under any pressure or discomfort her against her will, in any way that would be a deterrent to her growth and upbringing. 7. That both the parties further agree that they shall not cause any hindrance/interference in each others way for taking care of their respective old and ailing parents (mother in both the cases). 8. That the parties hereto have therefore agreed to withdraw all cases/proceedings/complaints pending in different courts/forum between the parties as has been detailed in the order dt. 12.02.2013 in SLP (C) Nos. 19266/12 & 20200/12 and for this the parties would appear before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the notified date for recording of their consent to quash all such proceedings pending in different courts. 9. 12.02.2013 in SLP (C) Nos. 19266/12 & 20200/12 and for this the parties would appear before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the notified date for recording of their consent to quash all such proceedings pending in different courts. 9. That upon signing of this Agreement/Compromise Deed, all complaints as may have been filed by both the parties against each other and their respective families, shall be treated as withdrawn/closed and if any pending shall be withdrawn by the respective parties and their family members. 10. That it is mutually agreed between parties to this Agreement/Compromise Deed executed between them that they shall abide by and be bound by the respective clauses and sub-clauses recorded in this Agreement/Compromise Deed. 11. This Deed of Compromise executed by the parties on the 6th day of January, 2014 in the presence of following witnesses.” 6. The amicable settlement entered between the parties was placed before the Supreme Court and Hon’ble Supreme Court after taking into consideration the terms and conditions of the amicable settlement entered between the parties on 6th January, 2014 passed the following order on 10.01.2014:- “The parties have entered into an amicable settlement, terms whereof has been set out in writing and filed in this Court. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the parties will have no difficulty in taking further steps pursuant to the said settlement so that all other pending matters are concluded/disposed of in light of the said settlement. In light of the said settlement nothing further for consideration in these SLPs which are disposed of in terms of the said settlement. Needless to say the parties shall take steps in aid of the settlement arrived at between the parties.” 7. In the Interim Order dated 12.02.2013 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, a reference has been given at Serial No. 8 of FIR No. 118 of 2008, pursuant to which the proceedings have been initiated which is subject matter of the present Application preferred under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 8. Applicant No. 1-Smt. Himal Tewari, applicant No. 2-Smt. Manorama Tewari, applicant No. 3-Smt. Poonam Trivedi, applicant No.4-Smt. Neelam Khan, and applicant No.5-Shri Ashraf Khan are present through V.C. Respondent No.2-Rupali Tewari is also present through V.C. along with her husband (applicant No.1). 9. This Compounding Application is also supported with the affidavit of each of the applicants and respondent No. 2. 10. 9. This Compounding Application is also supported with the affidavit of each of the applicants and respondent No. 2. 10. This Court has gone through the terms and conditions of the Settlement, the cognizance of which has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and further this Court also interacted with each of the applicants and respondent No. 2 and after interaction, all the parties submit that there are no disputes in between the parties and respondent No. 2 is now living with applicant No. 1 happily. 11. Per contra, Mr. Saurabh Pandey, learned Brief Holder for the State submits that offences under Sections 498-A of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act are not compoundable, however, he fairly submits that since the allegations appear to be personal in nature, these offences may be compounded in the light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another (2012) 10 SCC 303 . Apart from this, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the terms and conditions of the Settlement, the cognizance of which has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court is of the view that the Compounding Application deserves to be allowed. 12. Consequently, the Compounding Application is allowed. The proceeding of Criminal Case No. 492 of 2013 State vs. Himal Tewari and others, wherein the applicants are facing trial in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the Court of Vth Additional Senior Civil Judge/ACJM Dehradun, District Dehradun are quashed. 13. Accordingly, the present C-482 application is also disposed of.