MUKUND MARTAND CHITNIS Vs. MADHURI MUKUND CHITNIS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted in both the matters. Heard Mr. U. R. Lalit, learned counsel for the appellant, the 1st respondent in person and counsel for the State Government who states that the disputes essentially between the appellant and the respondent and the State Government will abide by such orders as this Court may deem appropriate to pass.

(2.) Ironically in the life of the appellant and the 1st respondent their marriage at Pune on 15th July, 1983 opened a sad and unfortunate chapter in life. On the wedding night itself the husband suspected the chastity of the wife. The bitterness that commenced soon culminated into a separation within less than a month's time. Allegations and counter-allegations came to be made. The husband resorted to mud-slinging and character assassination. A complaint of theft was also lodged against the wife. A search warrant was taken out. The wife's residence was searched for ornaments alleged to have been stolen by her and an inventory was prepared. This was unfortunate and ill-advised. All this added to the bitterness which led to the filing of two separate complaints of defamation under S. 500, Indian Penal Code by the wife. In addition thereto a complaint was also lodged under S. 498A, Indian Penal Code, which has ended in a conviction. In that complaint, while convicting the husband under S. 498A, the High Court has sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 30,000/- in default to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for six months. In the two complaints lodged under S. 500, Indian Penal Code, the husband was acquitted by the trial Court but on appeal he came to be convicted by the High Court and has been sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for two months and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month, in each case.

(3.) When these two appeals were taken up for hearing we were taken through the unsavoury past and we thought that it was in the interest of both the husband and the wife that the series of allegations and counter allegations between the two and their family members should come to an end. We also felt that it was essential to ensure the wife's economic rehabilitation so that she may be able to live the rest of her life peacefully. The marriage has already ended in a divorce. In the divorce proceedings she has been awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month. We, therefore, thought it proper to suggest to the parties if they could work out an amicable settlement which would permit the wife to live the rest of life without being dependent on the appellant-husband and without being required to make her rounds to courts.. Counsel for the appellant also adopted a very positive attitude and shared our anxiety to ensure that the wife was adequately compensated for the mental agony, strain and stress that she had undergone on account of the allegations made against her. After some discussion, the parties arrived at a settlement whereunder the appellant-husband agreed to acquiesce in the decision of the High Court convicting him under S. 498A, Indian Penal Code and to pay a fine of Rs. 30,000/ - within the time allowed by the High Court. In other words, he has agreed not to appeal against the said order of the High Court in C.R.A. No. 98/90 convicting him under S. 498A, Indian Penal Code. He has agreed that he will deposit the fine within the time allowed by the High Court and it would be open to the wife to withdraw that amount as per the High Court's order. That would put an end to that proceeding, once and for all.