Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"the Settlement Agreement"/ "the Agreement"

"PDCs"

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

9. Counsel for the Petitioner assails the correctness of the procedure adopted by the Trial Court, contending that since a settlement was voluntarily executed between the parties and in fact undertakings given to the Court were partly acted upon through an initial payment, the Settlement Agreement could not have been declared null and void. It is urged that the proper course, in the event of breach by the Respondents, was to enforce the terms of the Agreement in accordance with the decision judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Dayawati v. Yogesh Kumar Gosain,7 wherein it was held that if an accused fails to comply with a mediated settlement, the Magistrate is empowered to invoke Section 431 read with Section 421 Cr.P.C for recovery of the agreed amount as a fine. In the said case, the Court further clarified that breach of an undertaking given before a Magistrate could attract recourse to other appropriate measures, including proceedings under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to secure compliance with the undertaking and orders passed thereon.

2017:DHC:6199-DB ANALYSIS

14. The Court has considered the afore-noted facts and contentions and perused the material on record. The Settlement Agreement was executed through a court-referred mediation, pursuant to which part-payment of INR 2,43,500/- was admittedly made on 20th December, 2016 before the Magistrate. However, default ensued when the PDCs contemplated under the Agreement were not furnished. The Petitioner contended that the mediated terms continue to be enforceable in law notwithstanding such default and that the balance amount is liable to be recovered in terms of Section 431 read with Section 421 of Cr.P.C. The challenge, therefore, centres on whether the impugned orders declining enforcement of the mediated terms accord with the legal position articulated by the Division Bench in Dayawati.

109. Let us examine as to whether the legislature has provided any mechanism in the Cr.P.C. for recovery of monetary amounts.

110. We have extracted Section 421 of the Cr.P.C. above which provides the mechanism to recover fines, by issuing a warrant for the levy of the amount by attachment and sale of any movable property belonging to the offender and/or by issuing a warrant authorizing the realization of amounts as arrears of land revenue from movable and immovable property of the defaulter.

17. The Division Bench further clarified that where a mediated settlement has been accepted and recorded by the Court, any breach of its terms by one of the parties, particularly the accused, cannot be permitted to frustrate the settlement or evade compliance. In such cases, the Court is empowered to enforce the undertaking through appropriate legal mechanisms, including proceedings under Section 431 read with Section 421 of Cr.P.C and, where applicable, contempt jurisdiction. However, in the absence of a judicial order accepting the mediated settlement, no enforceable rights arise under the criminal process and the aggrieved party must seek other appropriate remedies in accordance with law.