Supreme Court - Daily Orders
B. Rajendhran vs State Rep. By Inspector Of Police And ... on 3 May, 2023
Author: Dinesh Maheshwari
Bench: Dinesh Maheshwari
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1421 OF 2023
(Arising from SLP (Crl.) No. 3395/2022)
B. RAJENDHRAN & ANR. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
2. Though a prayer has been made in the application IA No.85330/2023 that the applicant may be impleaded as respondent No.3, but in the totality of circumstances and the order proposed to be passed on the basis of settlement of parties; it is appropriate to allow the said applicant to join as appellant No.3. Ordered accordingly.
3. Learned counsel for the parties have referred to the Memorandum of Compromise executed by and between the parties on 12.04.2023 and have submitted that all the disputes and differences of the parties having been amicably resolved, appropriate and necessary orders may Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Neetu Khajuria Date: 2023.05.08 16:07:40 IST be passed in terms of the settlement.
Reason:4. Learned counsel for the appellants has moved another application (IA No.93276/2023) duly signed by 2 appellant No.3 and respondent No.2 in this Court with a prayer to dissolve their marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent and to quash/close all the matters and proceedings filed and pending between the parties in terms of the Memorandum of Compromise, by invoking our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
The Memorandum of Compromise dated 12.04.2023 reads as under:
“MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE REACHED BETWEEN THE PARTIES
1. The Second Respondent Ms. B. Priyanga, D/o.
E. Baskaran and the impleaded Petitioner Mr. B.R.Mukundhan, S/o. Mr. B.Rajendhran are the Husband and Wife whose marriage was solemnized on 28.06.2021. The Petitioners Mr. B.Rajendhran and Mrs.R.Manjula are the parents of Mr. B.R.Mukundhan. Ms. R. Shalini is the sister of Mr. B.R.Mukundhan.
2. Sometime after the marriage, on account of incompatibility between Mr. B.R.Mukundhan and Ms. B. Priyanga the marriage is broken down irretrievably. The efforts of the elders to reunite them have miserably failed. As of now, there are now litigations pending between the parties are detailed below:
i) A case under section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act filed by Ms. B. Priyanga is pending before the Additional Mahila Court, Alandur, Chennai in D.V.C No. 2 of 2023 against Mr. B.R.Mukundhan, Mr. B. Rajendhran, Mrs. R. Manjula and Ms. R. Shalini. The Respondents in the said case have already made an appearance and the trial of the case is in progress.
ii) On the complaint of Ms. B. Priyanga, the Inspector of Police, - W23 all women police station, Royapettah, Chennai has registered a 3 case in Crime No. 6 of 2021 for offences under sections 294B, 323, 498A, 406, 506(i) IPC r/w section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act and section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and the investigation is in progress.
iii) Mr. B.R.Mukundhan and Ms. R. Shalini have already been granted Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 6 of 2021. The Petitions for Anticipatory Bail by Mr. B. Rajendhran and Mrs. R. Manjula had been dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court and against which they have filed SLP No. 3395 of 2022 which is pending before this Hon'ble Court. This Hon'ble Court has granted interim protection to them from arrest. Further by order dated 13.05.2022, this Hon'ble Court has directed that the bank locker in Indian Bank Peters Road Branch, Chennai shall not be opened. However, this Hon'ble Court by a subsequent order dated 29.03.2023 has permitted the parties to open the locker and to exchange the properties kept in the locker in the presence of the inspector of police after taking an inventory.
iv) Ms. B. Priyanga has made a complaint to the Protection Officer, Chennai under the Dowry Prohibition Act in ROC No. 124 of 2021 against her husband, father in law, Mother in law and Sister in law and the same is pending enquiry.
3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court referred the matter to the Madras High Court Mediation Centre to settle all the issues between the parties. Unfortunately, it failed. On the submission made by both parties, this Hon’ble Court again requested the Mediator to hold mediation between the parties. This time though, the parties could arrive at a settlement, there was no finality reached. Therefore, the Mediator appears to have sent a report accordingly.
4. In the meanwhile, the well-wishers and the relatives intervened in the matter and on their advice and after having taken note of all the consequences of the litigations and having been satisfied that there is no chance at all for 4 them for a reunion as the marriage has irretrievably broken, the parties have decided to dissolve the marriage and also to settle all the issues between them as detailed below:-
TERMS OF SETTLEMENT:
I) Mr.B.R.Mukundhan and Ms. B. Priyanga have mutually agreed to dissolve the marriage once for all and therefore, they pray to this Hon'ble Court to dissolve the marriage on the ground that the marriage has irretrievably broken and accordingly to pass a decree of divorce by invoking the jurisdiction of the Hon'ble Court under Article 142 of the Constitution. A separate petition to the said effect will be filed.
II) The Parties mutually agree that the entire case against all the accused in Crime No. 6 of 2021 on the file of W23, All Women Police Station, Royapettah, Chennai may be quashed by this Hon'ble Court on the basis of this compromise.
III) The parties further mutually agree that the Look Out Circular issued against Mr. B.R.Mukundhan to prevent him from traveling out of India shall be withdrawn and the same may be quashed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The letters given by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Royapettah, Chennai to the U.K and U.S.A embassy not to allow Mr. B.R.Mukundhan to travel to those countries may be quashed by this Hon'ble Court.
IV) The parties further mutually agree that the proceedings pending before the Additional Mahila Court, Alandur, Chennai in D.V.C No. 2 of 2023 may be terminated by this Hon'ble Court as per this compromise entered into between the parties.
V) The parties mutually agree that the complaint in C.S.R. No. 79/2022 before the B4 Police Station, High Court made by Mr. B.R.Mukundhan against Ms. B. Priyanga and her father Mr. E. Baskaran may be quashed and if 5 there is any complaint against Mr. B.R.Mukundhan and his family members, the same shall also be quashed.
VI) The parties further mutually agree that the complaint in ROC No. 124 of 2021 pending before the Protection Officer, Dowry Prohibition Act, Chennai against Mr. B.R.Mukundhan and his family members may be quashed as per this compromise entered into between the parties.
VII) The parties further mutually agree that as a one time settlement, and in full quit of all the claims of Ms. B. Priyanga, Mr. B.R.Mukundhan shall pay a total sum of Rs.
32,00,000/- towards permanent alimony and maintenance. The said payment of Rs. 32,00,000/- shall be in the following manner:
VIII) Out of Rs. 32,00,000/- (Rupees thirty two lakhs only) as mentioned above, Mr. B.R.Mukundhan shall pay Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven lakhs only) by Demand Draft to Ms. B. Priyanga on or before 15.04.2023. The balance sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only) shall be paid by way of Demand Draft. The Demand Draft bearing DD No. 848306897 dated 03.04.2023 for a Sum of 25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only) drawn on Indian Overseas Bank, Dr. R.K. Salai branch, shall be handed over to Ms. B. Priyanga in open court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court during the final hearing of SLP in SLP No. 3395 of 2022.
In the bank locker at Indian Bank, Peters Road Branch, Chennai One Rose Gold Diamond Necklace, One pair of Rose Gold Diamond Earrings and One pair of Rose Gold Diamond Bangles belonging to Mr. B.R.Mukundhan were kept and the worth of all the three together is estimated at Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Only). On opening the locker as per the permission granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, Mr. B.R.Mukundhan shall handover the above three jewels to Ms. B. Priyanga and thereafter, she will return these jewels to Mr. B.R. Mukundhan on receiving the Demand Draft 6 for the sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Only) as mentioned herein above on 15.04.2023 along with the original bills and guarantee cards. Thus, on handing over of the jewels by Ms. B. Priyanga and the Demand Draft for Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees seven lakhs only) by Mr. B.R. Mukundhan on 15.04.2023 and on handing over of the Demand Draft of 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five lakhs Only) before the Hon'ble Supreme Court during the final hearing of SLP in SLP No. 3395 of 2022 the entire permanent alimony and maintenance amount of Rs. 32,00,000/- (Rupees thirty two Lakhs only) shall stand paid in full and final quit and there shall be no further claims made by Ms.B. Priyanga whatsoever.
IX) The parties mutually agree that on opening the Bank locker, the rest of the articles kept in the locker which admittedly belong to Ms. B. Priyanga shall be handed over to her except Two Rings made of Gold and Diamonds which admittedly belong to Mr. B.R.Mukundhan and the same shall be handed over to him.
X) The parties mutually agree that Ms. B. Priyanga shall return the Gold Mangalsutra tied at the time of marriage which is now in her possession to Mr. B.R.Mukundhan on the day when the SLP comes up for final hearing.
XI) The silver articles presented by the parents of Ms. B. Priyanga to the couple as shown in the photographs taken at a time of marriage are presently in the possession of Mr. B.R.Mukundhan. Now Mr. B.R.Mukundhan shall return all these articles to Ms. B. Priyanga in the presence of the Counsel for both the parties and in acknowledgement of the same Ms. B. Priyanga shall issue a receipt.
XII) The other seervarisai articles such as wooden cot, mattress, Godrej Almirah, Dressing Table, Silk Sarees and other items are now in the possession of Mr. B.R.Mukundhan. Mr. B.R.Mukundhan shall return all these articles to Ms. B. Priyanga in the presence of the counsel for both parties and in acknowledgement 7 of the same Ms. B. Priyanga shall issue a receipt.
XIII) The parties mutually agree that there shall be no more litigation or complaint or any other proceeding either initiated or continued against each other.
XIV) The parties namely Mr. B.R.Mukundhan, Mr. B. Rajendran, Mrs. R.Manjula and Ms. R. Shalini and Ms. B. Priyanga shall have no more claim whatsoever against each other and against the family members and relatives of the parties.
Dated at Chennai on this the 12th of April 2023. To be signed by: -
Sd/- Sd/-
Mr. B.R. Mukundhan Ms. B. Priyanga
Sd/-
Mr. B. Rajendran
Sd/-
Mrs. R. Manjual
Sd/-
Ms. R. Shalini
WITNESS: - WITNESS: -
1) Sd/- 1) Sd/-
P.DilliBabu J.Suresh
S/o Prithvi Raj S/o Janardhanan
Address: 15/20, Gangai Amman Age 53
Koil Lane, Royapettah, Neem flat.12, Sri
Lakshmi nagar
Chennai 600 014 2nd main road,
Aadhar : 4890 0241 2043 Valasaravakkam,
Chennai 600 087.
2) Sd/- 2) Sd/-
K.Rani E.Baskaran
W/o. Karthick S/o N. Elumalai
Address: 39/51, BB Road Age 55
2nd street, 2G Vijay Ten Square,
Dr Natesan Street No 3/196
Thiruvallikeni, Manapakkam main road,
Chennai 6000005 Manapakkam,
8
Aadhar: 7787 6549 2649 Chennai 600 125”
5. The parties to the marriage are present in-person in the Court and have prayed for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent and have also prayed for waiver of waiting period.
6. As per settlement arrived at between the parties, the demand draft bearing No.848306897 in the sum of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five lakh) has been handed over to respondent No.2 today in the Court.
7. It has also been submitted ad idem by the learned counsel for the parties as also the learned counsel for the State that the requirements of the orders earlier passed in this matter have been carried out, particularly regarding opening of the locker and appropriate distribution of the contents of the locker.
8. It is further submitted that other requirements of the settlement agreement as regards returning/exchange of articles have also been completed and no other part of the settlement agreement remains to be executed between the parties except seeking appropriate orders from this Court.
9. Learned counsel for the parties frankly submit that the parties having arrived at settlement and the terms of settlement having been fulfilled, necessary 9 orders may be passed by invoking our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
10. Having regard to the above, and in the circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the memorandum of compromise entered into between the parties deserves to be accepted; and the prayer jointly made, for dissolution of marriage solemnized on 28.06.2021, deserves to be granted. Further, it is just and proper that all the proceedings pending between the parties be disposed of, on the terms and conditions as stated and agreed to by the parties. As an obvious consequence, the Look-out Circular dated 29.03.2022 issued against appellant No.3 looses its relevance and the same also deserves to be quashed.
11. Accordingly, and in view of the above:
(a) The marriage solemnized between the appellant No. 3 and respondent No. 2 on 28.06.2021 stands dissolved by decree of divorce by mutual consent by invoking the powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
(b) The FIR No. 6 of 2021 dated 22.12.2021 registered with W23, All Women Police Station, Royapettah, Chennai stands quashed.
(c) The Look-out Circular dated 29.03.2022 against the appellant No.3 also stands quashed.
(d) The proceedings pending before the Additional Mahila Court, Alandur, Chennai in D.V.C No. 2 of 2023 are also quashed.
10(d) The complaint in C.S.R. No. 79 of 2022 before the B4 Police Station, High Court also stands quashed.
(e) The complaint in ROC No. 124 of 2021 pending before the Protection Officer, Dowry Prohibition Act, Chennai against the appellants and their family members stands quashed.
12. The Memorandum of Compromise dated 12.04.2023 is taken on record, made a part of this order, and accepted by the Court. All claims stand settled in terms thereof.
13. The parties agree that, henceforth, they will not initiate any proceedings against each other in reference to the issues which stand foreclosed in terms of the settlement agreement. They also undertake to abide by their obligations without any exception.
14. Consequently, this appeal is disposed of in the aforementioned terms. All pending applications also stand disposed of.
....................,J.
(DINESH MAHESHWARI) ....................,J.
(J.B. PARDIWALA) NEW DELHI;
MAY 03, 2023.
11
ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.6 SECTION II-C
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3395/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24-01-2022 in CRLOP No. 25357/2021 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) B. RAJENDHRAN & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.53467/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.53469/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ) Date : 03-05-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv.
Mr. M.p. Parthiban, AOR Ms. Priyaranjani Nagamuthu, Adv. Mr. A.s.vairawan, Adv.
Mr. R. Sudhakaran, Adv.
Mr. Amod Bidhuri, Adv.
Ms. Shalini Mishra, Adv.
Mr. T. Hari Hara Sudhan, Adv.
Mr. G.r. Vikash, Adv.
Mr. Bilal Mansoor, Adv.
Mr. K.deivendran, Adv.
Mr. D. Alagendren, Adv.
Mr. M.a. Aruneshe, Adv.
Mr. Vishal Tiwari, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. K. Paari Vendhan, AOR Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Ms. Vaidehi Rastogi, Adv.12
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.
All pending applications also stand disposed of.
(NEETU KHAJURIA) (RANJANA SHAILEY) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (Signed order is placed on the file.)