Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Jitendra Kumar vs State Of U.P on 2 February, 2015
Bench: Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, Vikramajit Sen
ITEM NO.34 COURT NO.4 SECTION II
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). 335/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/10/2013
in CRLMA No. 39069/2013 passed by the High Court Of Judicature at
Allahabad)
JITENDRA KUMAR Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P & ORS Respondent(s)
(With appln. (s) for stay and office report)
WITH
SLP(Crl) No. 4094/2014
(With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report)
Date : 02/02/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. K. B. Rohtagi,Adv.
Mr. Mahesh Kasana, Adv.
Ms. Aparna Rohatgi Jain, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Both the appeals stand disposed of in terms of the signed order.
(Ashwani Kumar) (Suman Jain) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Gulshan Kumar Arora Date: 2015.02.09 09:55:51 IST (Signed order is placed in the file) Reason: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 223 OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.335/2014) JITENDRA KUMAR APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF U.P & ORS RESPONDENT(S) WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 224 OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.4094/2014) KEWAL SINGH & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF U.P & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R Leave granted.
These appeals have been preferred against the orders dated 30.10.2013 and 14.02.2014 passed by the High Court of judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Application No. 39069 of 2013 and Criminal Misc. Application No.4895 of 2014 respectively. By the impugned orders the High Court dismissed the petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No 335 of 2013.
As both the cases arise out of a common matrimonial dispute the matter was referred to the Mediation Center of this Court. The Supreme Court Mediation Center by letter dated 8 th October, 2014 has intimated that the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement. The settlement agreement dated 27th September, 2014 is on record. The relevant portion of the said settlement agreement reads as follows:
“This Settlement Agreement is entered into between petitioner - Mr. Jitendra Kumar, s/o Shri Kewal Singh, :2: R/o Village - Mundala, P.S. Chhajlet, District Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh and Ms. Suman Raj, D/o Mr. Rajesh Kumar, R/o 2/1541, Budhi Vihar, Manjhola, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.
The marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized as per Hindu rites and customs on 21.06.2010 at Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh. A male child namely Somya Kumar was born on 12.07.2011 from this wedlock. Both the parties resided together as husband and wife till 20.10.2012 and thereafter disputes and differences had arisen between the parties hereto and consequently various cases civil, criminal and matrimonial were filed against each other details of which are given in the foregoing paras.
This matter was referred to mediation by the Hon'ble Court vide Order dated 08.09.2014.
Mediation sessions, both joint and private, were held with the parties on 17.09.2014 and and today i.e. 27.09.2014.
The parties have voluntarily and with their consent arrived at an amicable settlement through the process of mediation on the terms set out hereunder:
1. That the parties have agreed to get their marriage dissolved by mutual consent. The parties have further agreed to request the Hon'ble Supreme Court to grant such decree under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and shall jointly move an application for this purpose. However, should the Hon'ble Supreme Court decline to do the same, the parties have agreed to file the First Motion under Section 13B(1) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the appropriate Family Court at Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh immediately after passing of an order by this Hon'ble court.
2. That the parties have agreed that the respondent will pay a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rs.
Fifteen Lacs only) in total out of which a FDR of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rs. Five Lacs only) will be given in the name of the minor son Somya Kumar and nominee will be the respondent-mother Ms. Suman Raj and balance Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rs. Ten Lacs only) will be paid by the respondent to the petitioner by demand draft in the name of the petitioner “Suman Raj” within three months before the Hon'ble Supreme Court at the time of passing of decree for divorce. However, in the event the Hon'ble Supreme Court declines to pass the decree of divorce under Article 142 of the :3: Constitution of India and the parties have to approach the Family Court at Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, the said amount shall be paid in two tranches of Rs. 5,00,000/- each. Rs. 5,00,000/- shall be paid at the time of passing of order on First Motion and remaining Rs. 5,00,000/- shall be paid at the time of passing of order on Second Motion.
3. The following cases are pending between the parties:
(I) Case No. 335/2013 filed under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 and 3/4 of D.P. Act by the respondent-wife against the appellant-husband pending in the Court of AMM, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.
(II) Case No. 319/2013 filed under Domestic Violence Act by the respondent-wife against the appellant-husband pending in the Court of AMM(3), Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.
(III) Case No. 79/9/2013 filed under under 125 Cr.P.C.
by the respondent-wife against the appellant-husband pending before Family Court, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.
(IV) Complaint Case No. 408/2013 titled as Jitendra Kumar Vs. Rajesh & Ors. field under Section 149, 452, 323, 392, 506 IPC by the appellant-husband against the father of the respondent and family members and relatives pending before CJM, Rampur, Uttar Pradesh.
(V) Case HMP No. 213/2012 filed under Section 9Hindu Marriage Act, by the appellant-husband against the respondent-wife pending before Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Rampur, Uttar Pradesh.
(VI) Case No. 132/2013 filed under Section 498A, 323, 5034 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act pending before ACJM-6, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.
4. That parties have agreed not to press the above mentioned cases till the pendency of the present Special leave Petition (C) No. 335 of 2014 and have agreed to withdraw the same immediately after payment of first installment of Rs. 5,00,000/- in the name of the respondent-wife.
5. That subject to the aforesaid terms, the parties have resolved all the dispute amicably in relation to the marriage and have been left with no claims against each other or their respective family members.
:4:6. That it is agreed between the parties that the custody of the minor son namely Somya Kumar shall remain with the respondent-mother forever and the petitioner-husband will have no visitation rights.
7. It is agreed that both the parties will not initiate any proceedings against each other with regard to this matrimonial alliance and respondent-wife undertakes not to file any proceedings against petitioner-husband on behalf of minor child namely Somya Kumar till he attains majority.
8. It is further agreed between the parties that they will not put any allegations against each other in the society and relatives and friends.
9. The parties have agreed and undertake not to litigate or raise any claim in future in relation to the marriage against each other or their respective family members.
10. By signing this Agreement the parties hereto solemnly state and affirm that they have no further claims or demands against each other and all the disputes and differences have been amicably settled by the parties hereto through the process of mediation.
11. The parties undertake to abide by the terms and conditions set out in the above mentioned agreement, which have been arrived without any coercion, duress or collusion and undertake not to raise any dispute whatsoever henceforth.” In view of the settlement agreement reached between the parties, we set aside the impugned orders and quash the following proceedings:
(I) Case No.335/2013 filed under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3/4 of D.P. Act by the respondent-wife against the appellant-husband pending in the court of AMM, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.:5:
(II) Case No. 319/2013 filed under Domestic Violence Act by the respondent-wife against the appellant-husband pending in the Court of AMM(3), Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.
(III) Case No. 79/9/2013 filed under under 125 Cr.P.C.
by the respondent-wife against the appellant-husband pending before Family Court, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.
(IV) Complaint Case No.408/2013 titled as Jitendra Kumar Vs. Rajesh & Ors. filed under Section 149, 452, 323, 392, 506 IPC by the appellant-husband against the father and relatives of the respondent pending before CJM, Rampur, Uttar Pradesh.
(V) Case HMP No. 213/2012 filed under Section 9Hindu Marriage Act, by the appellant-husband against the respondent-wife pending before Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Rampur, Uttar Pradesh.
(VI) Case No. 132/2013 filed under Section 498A, 323, 504 IPC and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act pending before ACJM-6, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.
In so far as payment to be made by the appellant-husband Jitendra Kumar in favour of the complainant-wife Ms. Suman Raj, it is informed that out of Rs. 15 lacs in total, an FDR of Rs.5 lacs in the name of the minor son Somya Kumar with nominee mother has been handed over. Rest of the amount being Rs. 10 lacs was to be paid by the appellant-husband to the complainant-wife Ms.Suman Raj towards full and final settlement of all her claims towards alimony, maintenance (past, present and future) in three months. Three months have already been passed after the settlement but the said amount of Rs. 10 lacs has not been paid in favour of the complainant-wife Ms. Suman Raj. We accordingly, extend the period :6: and direct the petitioner-husband Jitendra Kumar to pay the total sum of Rs. 10 lacs by 31st March, 2015 failing which all the proceedings shall stand revived and it will be open to the complainant-wife Ms. Suman Raj to move before this Court for initiation of the contempt proceedings against the appellant- husband Jitendra Kumar.
In so far as divorce by mutual consent, we allow the appellant-husband Jitendra Kumar and complainant-wife Ms. Suman Raj to file a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court where the complainant-wife Ms. Suman Raj is residing. As they are living separately for more than six months, they may also file a petition for waiving the period of 6 months. If a joint petition is filed by the parties, the family court will waive the period and pass a decree for divorce by mutual consent on the date of appearance of both the parties or within a week thereof.
The parties will be guided by the rest part of the settlement. Both the appeals stand disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.
............................J. (SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA) ...........................J. (VIKRAMAJIT SEN) NEW DELHI FEBRUARY 2, 2015