IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.37219 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1092 Year- 2015 Thana -AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE
District- AURANGABAD
Kumar Anubhav, S/o Shri Arun Kumar Srivastava, resident of 15/C, Park Road,
D1/A Road No.1, Ashok Nagar, P.O.+P.S.- Argora Distt.- Ranchi, (Jharkhand)
presently residing at Sector III, H.E.C., Dhurva, Ranchi, (Jharkhand).
…. …. Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rina Kumari Sinha, W/o Kumar Anubhav, D/o Bipin Bihari Sinha, resident of
15/C, Park Road, D1/A Road No.1, Ashok Nagar, P.O.+P.S.- Argora Distt.-
Ranchi, (Jharkhand) presently residing at New Area, Maharaj Ganj Road, Near
P.N.B. Road, New Area Aurangabad, (Bihar).
…. …. Opposite Parties
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajni Kant Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Suresh Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party No.2: Mr. Laxman Lal Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 04-09-2017
This application under Section 482 of the Code of
criminal Procedure (for short „Cr. P.C.‟) has been filed for quashing
the order dated 18.05.2016 passed by the learned Sub Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in Complaint Case No.1092 of 2015
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37219 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017
2
whereby and whereunder the learned Sub Divisional Judicial
Magistrate has summoned the petitioner to face trial for the offences
punishable under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. The complaint case was filed on 27.11.2015
against the petitioner and other accused persons under Sections 147,
323, 379 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3
and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. According to the complainant, she was married to
the petitioner on 18.05.2014. At the time of marriage, her father had
given cash, goods and ornaments as gift but the petitioner and other
accused persons were not pleased and when she went to matrimonial
house after the marriage, the accused persons subjected her to cruelty
both physically and mentally and demanded dowry of Rs.10 lacs
which was conveyed to her parents. Her parents expressed their
inability to give the dowry, but assured them to fulfil the demand in
future, which did not pacify the accused persons who kept on
torturing her on account of non-fulfilment of demand of dowry. The
complainant has further alleged that she came to know that the
petitioner had illicit relationship with his sister-in-law and when she
raised objection in this regard, she was assaulted and abused. She has
alleged that subsequently, she came back to her parents‟ house and
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37219 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017
3
when she went again to her matrimonial house on 01.04.2015 the
accused persons did not allow her to enter into her matrimonial
house. When she came back to her parent‟s house after reporting this
incident to the police station. The complainant has lastly stated that
the accused persons visited her parent‟s house and asked her to
withdraw the case and when she insisted on going to her matrimonial
home the accused persons told her unless Rs. 10 lacs is paid as
dowry, she would not be accommodated in her matrimonial house.
4. After examination of the complainant on solemn
affirmation, statement of three other witnesses, namely, Vishal
Sinah, Reeta Sinha and Bipin Bihari Sinha were recorded in course
of inquiry conducted under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. Whereater, the
court below summoned the petitioner and others to face trial for the
offences under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections
3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act vide order dated 18.05.2016
5. Mr. Rajni Kant Mishra, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner submitted that during pendency of the instant case,
the petitioner and the complainant-opposite party no.2 agreed upon
to settlement of their entire dispute amicably in the light of the order
dated 15.07.2016 passed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Transfer
Petition (Civil) No.2062 of 2015 with T.P. (CRL.) No.220-221 of
2016 before the Mediator appointed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37219 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017
4
on 05.08.2016. He has submitted that the Hon‟ble Supreme Court
vide order dated 20.09.2016 passed in aforestated transfer petition
has directed the petitioner and opposite party no.2 to act in terms of
the aforesaid settlement agreement dated 05.08.2018. Learned
counsel for the petitioner has submitted that one of the criminal
proceedings arising out of Doranda (Arogra) P.S. Case No. 196 of
2015 filed by the opposite party no.2 has already been quashed in the
light of the aforementioned amicable settlement made between the
petitioner and the opposite party no.2 and the aforesaid direction of
the Hon‟ble Supreme Court by the Jharkhand High Court vide order
dated 05.01.2017 passed in Cr.M.P. No.2612 of 2016.
6. Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned Advocate for the
complainant-opposite party no.2 has supported the contentions
advanced on behalf of the petitioner. He has submitted that the
opposite party no.2 is living together with the petitioner after
aforesaid amicable settlement and she does not have any objection if
the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioner and his family
members is quashed.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
8. Be it noted that on 01.09.2017, both the
petitioner and the opposite party no.2 had appeared before the court
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37219 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017
5
in person. They had categorically stated that the entire disputes
between the parties have been resolved. The opposite party no.2 had
further stated that she is not interested in prosecution of the petitioner
either in the present case or in another case being Mahila Helpline
Case No.01 of 2016.
9. It would appear that apart from the present case,
there are some other cases between the parties. From perusal of the
order dated 05.01.2017 passed in Cr.M.P. No.2612 of 2016 by the
High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, which has been brought on
record by filing an interlocutory application, it would be evident that
Doranda (Arogra) P.S. Case No.196 of 2015 filed by the opposite
party no.2 against the petitioner under Section 498A of the Indian
Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has
already been quashed considering the amicable settlement between
the parties. It would also appear from the record that the opposite
party no.2 had filed a maintenance proceeding under Section 125 of
the Cr. P.C. before the court of Principal Judge, Family Court,
Aurangabad against the petitioner. It would further appear that two
transfer petitions were filed before the Supreme court in respect of
ongoing disputes between the parties vide Transfer Petition (C)
No.2062 of 2015 and Transfer Petition (CRL.) No.220-221 of 2016.
Those transfer petitions were referred to the Supreme Court
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37219 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017
6
Mediation Centre where conciliation was effected and the terms and
conditions evolved in the settlement agreement was agreed upon the
parties.
10. The settlement agreement made between the
parties before the Supreme Court Mediation Centre reads as under:-
“SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This Settlement Agreement is entered into
between the Petitioner Ms. Reena Kumari Sinha and
Respondent, Mr. Kumar Anubhav.
These matters were referred to mediation by
the Hon‟ble Court vide Order dated 15.07.2016.
Mediation session, both joint and private, was
held with the parties and their Counsels today i.e.
05.08.2016.
The parties have voluntarily and with their
consent arrived at an amicable settlement through
the process of medication on the terms set out
hereunder:
(a) That the parties have amicable resolved
their marital differences and agreed to resume
co-habitation forthwith in the place of the posting of
the respondent in his allotted quarter.
(b) That the parties agrees to discharge
their respective marital duties towards each other
and to give full respect and affection to each other
and their relatives.
(c) That the parties hereby withdraw all
allegations made against each other and the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37219 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017
7respective family members and express regret at the
turn of events that led to the multiple litigations
between the parties detailed hereunder.
(d) That the parties agreed that there will be
no interference in the daily married life of the parties
by the respective family members.
(e) That the following cases are pending
between the parties:-
A. MTS-60 of 2015 pending before the
Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi filed by the
Respondent against the Petitioner.
B. Proceedings under the Protection of
Women against Domestic Violence Act, registered as
MHL-01/2016 pending before the Court of Shri
Umesh Rai, Judicial Magistrate-I, Aurangabad, Bihar
filed by the Petitioner against the Respondent and his
family members.
C. Section 125 Cr.PC proceedings pending
before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad,
Bihar filed by the Petitioner against the Respondent.
D. FIR No. 196/2015, PS. Argora Ranchi,
under Sections 498A IPC, 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act
subsequently registered as GR No.1992 of 2015
pending before the Ld. SDJM Court Ranchi lodged by
the Petitioner against the Respondent and his family
members.
E. Complaint Case No.1092/2015 under
Sections 498A IPC, 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act
pending before the Ld. SDJM Court Aurangabad
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37219 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017
8lodged by the Petitioner against the Respondent and
his family members.
F. Anticipatory Bail Application
No.3493/2015 pending before the Hon‟ble
Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi.
That the concerned parties hereby agree to
withdraw the cases at Sr. No. A, B, C and F on the
respective next date of hearing. The parties agree
that the Respondent and his family members will
file a quashing petition before the Hon‟ble
Jharkhand High Court seeking the quashing the FIR
referred to at Sr. No. D within 4 weeks from today
and the petitioner will duly appear in the said
quashing petition to give no objection for quashing.
The Respondent and his family members have filed
a quashing petition before the Hon‟ble Ranchi High
Court seeking the quashing the Complaint referred
to at Sr. No. E. The parties hereby agree that the
petitioner will duly appear in the said quashing
petition to give no objection for quashing of the said
complaint. It will be open to the Respondent and his
family members to seek discharge in the said FIR
and/or complaint before the competent Ld. Trial
Court on the basis of this settlement and the
Petitioner will cooperate with the Respondent and
his family members in this regard. The parties agree
that should any further proceeding/litigation be
found to be pending between the parties and their
family members, the same shall be deemed to be
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37219 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017
9
withdrawn.
By signing this Agreement the parties hereto
solemnly state and affirm that all the disputes and
differences have been amicably settled by the parties
hereto through the process of mediation.
The parties undertake to abide by the terms
and conditions set out in the above mentioned
Agreement, which have been arrived without any
coercion, duress or collusion and undertake not to
raise any dispute whatsoever henceforth”.
11. It is thus, obvious that the parties have amicably
settled their dispute outside the Court.
12. Having regard to the nature of the dispute and the
stand of the parties and the facts noted above, it is deemed necessary
in the interest of justice to allow the present application specially in
view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Gian
Singh vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] wherein it has been
held that criminal cases particularly the offences arising from
commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like
transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to
dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically
private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their
dispute, the High Court would be justified in quashing a criminal
proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of inherent jurisdiction
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37219 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017
10
even if offences are non-compoundable.
13. Accordingly, Complaint Case No. 1092 of 2015
corresponding to Tr. No.1819 of 2016 pending before the learned
Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad is hereby quashed.
14. The application stands allowed.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)
Sanjeet/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 08.09.2017
Transmission 08.09.2017
Date
