HARMEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C., have been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of the proceedings of criminal case No. 283 of 2010, State v. Vijay Singh Dhaliwal and Others, relating to offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity I.P.C.) and under Section 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar,

(2.) Brief fact giving rise to the instant petitions are that the daughter of respondent No. 2, namely, Shailly got married on 11.12.2003 with Vijay Singh Dhaliwal (petitioner in C-482 No. 357/2011) according to Hindu rituals. However, the applicant/petitioners, right from the marriage, were not satisfied with the dowry given in the marriage and started harassing Smt. Shailly. On the passage of time differences arose between the couple, which resulted into the lodging of First Information Report dated 16.10.2009 against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406, I.P.C. and under Section 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act. The matter was investigated by the Police and charge-sheet was submitted against all the petitioners. On submission of the charge-sheet, the learned Magistrate concerned appears to have taken cognizance in the matter vide order dated 21.1.2010. After taking cognizance, the proceeding of the Trial Court was challenged in C-482 No. 335/ 2010 by the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the daughter of respondent No. 2 and this Court vide order dated 22.4.2010 interfered into the matter and stayed the proceedings only in respect of the father-in law and mother-in-law of the daughter of respondent No. 2. During the pendency of the criminal case No. 283/2010 before the Trial Court, it appears that, both the parties settled their dispute amicably outside the Court and they entered into a compromise (contained as Annexure No. 2 to the compounding application No. 378/2011 in C-482 petition No. 335/2010). Thereafter, Vijay Singh Dhaliwal (petitioner in C-482 No. 357/2011), on the basis of said compromise, got filed Petition No. C-482, No. 357/2011, annexing therewith compromise deed and compounding application (contained as Annexure No. 5 to the petition). This application is accompanied by two affidavits, which have been signed by the applicant No. 1 Harmeet Singh and opposite party No. 2-Narendra Kumar Narula (complainant);

(3.) In the compromise deed, it is mentioned that the daughter of respondent No. 2, namely, Smt. Shailly and her husband Vijay Singh Dhaliwal have moved petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act before Principal Judge, Family Court, Udham Singh Nagar, which is pending consideration. For getting mutual decree of divorce, the husband i.e. Vijay Singh Dhaliwal has paid full and final alimony, as agreed between the parties, to the tune of Rs. 4,50,000 in the name of Smt. Shailly, through Demand Draft No. 141473 dated 28.10.2010 amounting to Rs. 1,50,000, Demand Draft No. 141271 dated 28.10.2010 amounting to Rs. 2,00,000 payable at Punjab National Bank, Rudrapur and Demand Draft No. 029704 dated 29.10.2010 amounting to Rs. 1,00,000 payable at Central Bank of India, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar. Photocopies of the said Demand Drafts are annexed as Annexure No. 4 to C-482 No. 357/2011. According to compromise deed, Smt. Shailly has accepted the full and final alimony by way of above noted drafts and she will not claim any further compensation. It is also agreed between the contestant parties that all the pending cases between them, shall be withdrawn. It is mentioned in the compromise deed that now on the basis of the terms and conditions mentioned in the compromise deed, the complainant's party does not intend to prosecute the petitioners in the Criminal Case No. 283 of 2010 'State v. Vijay Singh Dhaliwal and Others', for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 406, IPC and under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act relating to Police Station, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. It is prayed in the compounding applications that on the basis of said compromise deed, the offences alleged against the petitioners may be compounded, as the complainant has no objection.