ANURAG CHOPRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners seek an order quashing FIR No. 198/88 dated 6th July, 1988 for offences under Ss. 498-A/406 of the Indian Penal Code registered at PS Srinivaspuri, New Delhi. The plea is that the petitioner No. 1 Mr. Anurag Chopra was married to respondent No. 2 Mrs. Sangita Chopra on 28th November, 1985 but owing to temperamental differences the relations between them became strained and petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 father and mother of said Mr. Anurag Chopra. Complaints were filed by both the sides with the police and other authorities levelling allegations of harassment and cruelty against each other.

(2.) A case vide FIR 198/88 was registered on a complaint lodged by respondent No. 2 on 2nd May, 1988 with the Assistant Commissioner of Police (South) Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, who after enquiry ordered the registration of a case under Ss. 498-A/406, IPC against all the three petitioners. It is now pleaded that subsequently due to intervention of relatives and friends a settlement has been reached between the parties to the effect that petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 shall seek a decree of divorce by mutual consent as they have come to the conclusion that they could no longer live together as husband and wife. As part of reconciliation efforts, formal compromise was drawn up on 4th September, 1988 whereunder it had been agreed that petitioner No. 1 shall pay to respondent No. 2 a sum of Rs. 75,000/- in all towards all claims of her on account of Stridhan. dowry, maintenance and alimony and further that she would be entitled to take possession of all the articles which were seized by the police on registration of the case which were on superdari with her and in addition Kelvinator Fridge (165 Litres) would be returned to her. Simultaneously with the execution of this compromise respondent No. 2 addressed a letter to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (South Delhi), Hauz Khas, New Delhi stating, with the intervention of certain relatives and friends and on the advice of certain other persons of repute a compromise has been arrived at between her and her husband and they have decided to separate by a decree of divorce by mutual consent, and that her husband had agreed to pay to her in all Rs. 75,000/- towards all claims on account of items of jewellery and other valuable items, against him and his parents, which amount shall also cover all her claims present or future towards compensation dowry, maintenance and alimony and that a sum of Rs. 40,000/- has been left in trust with Shri O.N. Vohra, a retired Judge of this Court and Shri K.K. Luthra, Senior Advocate and the balance of Rs. 35,000/- was agreed to be paid within a period of 6 to 8 weeks. She stated, because of this mutual settlement she did not desire any further proceedings in the case registered vide FIR 198/88 and prayed that the case may be cancelled as she did not want to pursue the matter and that the opposite party has no objection to the return of the goods to her, seized during investigation.

(3.) Pursuant to this compromise the husband and wife, namely, petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 moved an application under S.13-B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 as amended by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 for a decree of divorce by mutual consent which was received in the Court of Ms. Rekha Sharma, Additional District Judge on 7th September, 1988 where statements were recorded. After recording statements that the parties are advised to patch up their differences and live together as husband and wife, the Court ordered that the file be consigned reserving to them the rights to move a second motion for divorce in case they are unable to reconcile their differences within the statutory period prescribed under S.13-B(2) of the aforesaid Act.