SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Krishna Gulati vs Ut Chandigarh on 28 February, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No.M-43596 of 2018
Date of Decision: 28.02.2019

Krishna Gulati
…Petitioner(s)
Versus
U.T. Chandigarh
…Respondent(s)

CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA

Present:- Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Gautam Kaile, Advocate for
Mr. Rajiv Sharma, APP, UT, Chandigarh.

Mr. Puneet Bali, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Mukesh Mehra, Advocate
for the complainant.
*****

HARI PAL VERMA, J. (Oral)

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 438 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioner, who is mother-in-law of the complainant-Ridhima, in case FIR

No.66 dated 13.08.2018 under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC registered at

Police Station, Women Police Station, Chandigarh.

This Court vide order dated 04.10.2018 had granted interim

bail to the petitioner subject to her joining the investigation. However,

during the pendency of the present petition, the parties have shown their

inclination to settle their dispute and accordingly, vide order dated

1 of 5
10-03-2019 20:33:46 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-43596 of 2018 -2-

30.01.2019, the parties were directed to meet in the office of Mr. Puneet

Bali, Senior Advocate for the respondent-complainant, so as to explore the

possibility of some amicable settlement between the parties.

Pursuant thereto, it has been informed that the parties have

entered into a compromise and a settlement agreement dated 27.02.2019

has been reduced into writing, which is duly signed by the parties i.e. the

petitioner and Dr. Virender Sarwal, who is holding the power of attorney of

the complainant. Dr. Sarwal is father of the complainant. A photocopy of

the settlement agreement dated 27.02.2019, as signed by the respective

parties, is taken on record and is marked as Mark ‘A’.

In para 4 of the settlement, the schedule of total payment of

Rs.65,00,000/-, payable by the first party to the second party, is

incorporated, which reads as under:-

“4.1. That the LUMP-SUM TOTAL PAYMENT of INR
65,00,000 (Rupees Sixty-Five Lakhs Only) shall be made by
the FIRST PARTY to the SECOND PARTY, in the following
instalments and as per the following schedule:

4.1.1 A sum of INR 20,00,000 (Rupees Twenty Lakhs
Only) has been paid to the SECOND PARTY, in
the presence of the Witnesses named below, at
the very time of signing and execution of this
present SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, vide
Demand Draft No.500388 dated 26.02.2019
drawn on ICICI Bank in favour of ‘Ridhima
Sarwal’ Valuing INR 20,00,000 (Rupees Twenty
Lakhs only).

4.1.2 A sum of INR 5,00,000 (Rupees Five Lakhs
Only) shall be paid on the very day when the
Petition for Maintenance by RS is withdrawn.

2 of 5
10-03-2019 20:33:46 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-43596 of 2018 -3-

4.1.3. A sum of INR 5,00,000 (Rupees Five Lakhs
Only) shall be paid on the very day when the DV
Act Complaint by RS is withdrawn.
It is hereby clarified that the Petition for
Maintenance by RS as well as the DV Act
Complaint by RS may be withdrawn on one and
the same day; and, if the same is done by the
SECOND PARTY – then, the combined payment
of INR 10,00,000 (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) shall
be made on such one and the same day.
4.1.4. A sum of INR 5,00,000 (Rupees Five Lakhs
Only) shall be paid on the very day when the
SECOND PARTY provides adequate proof of the
requisite communication(s) having been duly
made to the concerned Passport Authority(s) in
India as well as the concerned Immigration
Authority(s) in the United States of America in
respect of withdrawing the Passport Proceedings,
as contemplated above.

4.1.5. A sum of INR 15,00,000 (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs
Only) shall be deposited by the FIRST PARTY
with the concerned Learned Registrar of the
Hon’ble High Court, at the time of filing the
appropriate Quashing Petition to get the FIR
quashed. It is hereby agreed that the said amount
of INR 15,00,000 (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Only)
shall be released to the SECOND PARTY on the
very day when the FIR is finally quashed by the
Hon’ble High Court. The said deposit shall also
be made by way of a Demand Draft in favour of
RS. However, should the said Demand Draft
‘expire’ by the time of its release – its FIRST
PARTY shall get it appropriately exchanged or

3 of 5
10-03-2019 20:33:46 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-43596 of 2018 -4-

‘revived’ by its Bank, after its release from the
Court.

4.1.6. A sum of INR 15,00,000 (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs
Only) shall be deposited by the FIRST PARTY
with the concerned Court, at the time of filing of
the Petition seeking ‘Mutual Divorce’. It is
hereby agreed that the said amount of INR
15,00,000 (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Only) shall be
released to the SECOND PARTY on the very day
when the Mutual Divorce Petition is finally
allowed and the Divorce between RS and AG is
finally confirmed by the concerned Court. The
said deposit shall also be made by way of a
Demand Draft in favour of RS. However, should
the said Demand Draft ‘expire’ by the time of its
release – the FIRST PARTY shall get it
appropriately exchanged or ‘revived’ by its Bank,
after its release from the Court.”

It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that a bank

draft for sum of Rs.20,00,000/- has already been paid to the father of the

complainant Dr. Virender Sarwal on 27.02.2019 vide Demand Draft

No.500388 dated 26.02.2019 in favour of Ridhima Sarwal, who is holding

the power of attorney of the complainant- Ridhima and this fact has not

been disputed by learned senior counsel appearing on his behalf.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the order

dated 04.10.2018, whereby the petitioner has been admitted on interim bail,

is made absolute, however, that will be subject to payment of costs of

Rs.25,000/-, to be deposited with the Poor Patients Welfare Fund of the

4 of 5
10-03-2019 20:33:46 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-43596 of 2018 -5-

Post Graduate Institute of Medical education and Research (PGIMER),

Chandigarh within 15 days from today.

However, it is made clear that the parties shall adhere to the

terms and conditions of the settlement agreement dated 27.02.2019 in letter

and spirit and either of the parties, who violates the terms of the settlement

agreement, shall be liable to contempt proceedings.

In case the petitioner violates the terms and conditions of the

settlement, the complainant would also be at liberty to seek cancellation of

anticipatory bail / revival of this petition. It is further directed that as the

matter has been compromised between the parties in terms of Settlement

Agreement, the complainant shall not pursue the FIR in question in any

manner.

February 28, 2019 ( HARI PAL VERMA )
AK JUDGE

Whether speaking / reasoned? Yes / No
Whether reportable? Yes / No

5 of 5
10-03-2019 20:33:46 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation