Allahabad High Court
Paritosh And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 March, 2020
Author: Narendra Kumar Johari
Bench: Narendra Kumar Johari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Reserved On:- 19.12.2019 Delivered On:- 3.3.2020 Court No.- 67 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18659 of 2015 Applicant :- Paritosh And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shilpa Ahuja Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Dinesh Kumar Mishra Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
1. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 30.08.2014 and set aside the entire proceeding of Complainant Case No.1240 of 2014 (Ruchi Versus Paritosh and others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mandi Dhanaura, District-Amroha pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Amroha.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that opposite party no.2/complainant was married with applicant no.1-Paritosh. Opposite party no.2/complainant- Ruchi lodged a complaint against the applicants on 14.07.2014 mentioning therein that her marriage was solemnized with applicant no.1 on 13.02.2013. In her matrimonial home, the family members of applicant no.1 were not happy with the dowry so given at the occasion of her marriage and they started demand of Rs.10 Lakhs as additional dowry. When the demand of additional dowry could not be fulfill by her parent, they started torturing and in furtherance of such demand they expelled her from her matrimonial home. The parents and relatives of complainant tried to negotiate the matter, but her in-laws were not ready and they threatened to kill her. Accordingly, she prayed to take action against her husband and in-laws.
3. After the statement of complainant under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. and statement of witnesses under Sections 202 Cr.P.C., Magistrate concerned passed the order dated 30.08.2014 to summon the applicants for trial under Section 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C.
4. In the meantime on 22.12.2013, a compromise took place between father of complainant and applicant no.2, in which it has been decided that after giving the sum of Rs.9.75 Lakhs as expenses of marriage they will be separated and no relation between complainant and applicant no.1 as husband and wife will subsist. All the legal proceedings shall be terminated at the instance of opposite party No.2 which are pending against the applicant no.1 and his family members. In pursuance of the aforesaid compromise, the applicant No.1 gave Rs.9.75 Lakhs to complainant's father. As per the report of Bank concerned, the father of opposite party no.2/complainant has received the said amount of Rs.9.75 Lakhs through D.D.R. on 01.05.2014.
5. Apart from that both the parties have filed a suit for divorce on the basis of mutual consent under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. The above facts were concealed by complainant in her complaint which was filed subsequently on 14.07.2014. Accordingly, the averments made in the complaint are false, vague and have been filed only to harass and humiliate the applicants. Therefore, the applicants have prayed to quash the impugned summoning order dated 30.08.2014 as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.1240 of 2014 (Ruchi Vs. Paritosh and others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that during the continuance of the proceeding, compromise took place between applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2/complainant on 27.07.2018. According to terms of compromise, both the parties will not file any case in court against each other in future, the cases pending in Court will also be taken back by concerning parties and they will live their lives separate and freely.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties finally and they are not interested to contest the case including present Case U/s 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act. The record shows that on 23.07.2019, this Court has considered the averments as mentioned in supplementary affidavit and passed the following order. The order dated 27.03.2019 is reproduced as under:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party no.1 and perused the record with the assistance of leaned counsel for the parties.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 30.8.2014 as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1240 of 2014 (Ruchi vs. Paritosh & others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 4 D.P. Act, police station Mandi Dhanaura, District Amroha, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Amroha.
It is submitted that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties on account of intervention of their well-wishers. Now parties have no grievance against each other. They want to lead their life in peaceful manner. A copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-1 of the supplementary affidavit. It is further contended that on account of compromise between the parties, further proceedings of the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in case of B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana 2003 (4) SCC 675, wherein the Apex Court has observed that courts to encourage settlement of marital disputes between the contesting spouses, so that they do not lose their youthful years in chasing interminable litigations.
Whether a compromise has taken place between the parties or not, can be best ascertained by the court below, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.
Learned counsel for the parties undertake to ensure the presence of the parties concerned before the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, on 22.4.2019 and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the genuineness of the compromise after taking the view of the parties concerned. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof, so that they may file the verification report before this Court.
Office is directed to send a copy of this order as well as the photocopy of the compromise annexed as Annexure No. 1 of the supplementary affidavit through FAX to the court concerned within ten days.
List this case on 1st of May, 2019 before the appropriate Bench.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant in the above mentioned case."
8. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that in compliance of the order of this Court dated 27.03.2019, the parties appeared before court concerned and the court concerned verified the compromise on 07.08.2019. The certified copy of the order has been submitted by applicants.
9. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2/complainant has not disputed the submission of learned counsel for the applicants rather he approved that the matter has been compromised between the parties and if the impugned summoning order dated 30.08.2018 is quashed then in that case, opposite party no.2/complainant has no objection. Learned A.G.A. has also not objected the argument of learned counsel for the applicants.
10. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2/complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
11. It has been submitted that the dispute between applicants and opposite party no.2/complainant is private and matrimonial in nature. Now, the parties have entered in compromise. Opposite party no.2/complainant does not want to proceed with her Complaint Case No.1240 of 2014 (Ruchi Vs. Paritosh and others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act.
12. Both the parties have appeared in the Sub-ordinate Court and verified the compromise deed. The certified copy of compromise deed is also available on record.
13. Considering the nature of dispute and dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narain and others, AIR 2019 (SC) 1296, Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014 Law Suit (SC) 202 and Gyan Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others as well as B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana 2003 (4) SCC 675 as the matrimonial dispute has been settled between the contesting parties, the impugned order is liable to quashed.
14. In view of the above, the summoning order dated 30.08.2014 passed by learned Magistrate in Complaint Case No.1240 of 2014 (Ruchi Vs. Paritosh and others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mandi Dhanaura, District-Amroha and proceedings consequent thereto are hereby quashed. The certified copies of verification order of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha dated 07.08.2019 and compromise deed shall be part of the record.
15. The present applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of accordingly.
(Narendra Kumar Johari, J.) Order Date :- 3.3.2020 SK Goswami