IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MMO No. 102 of 2018
Date of Decision No.3.01.2019
.
_
Puneet Bakshi …….Petitioner
Versus
Sunila Bakshi …..Respondent
_
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1 Yes.
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Vishal Panwar, Advocate.
_
Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):
By way of present petition filed under Article 227 of
the constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, challenge has been laid to judgment dated
4.12.2017, passed by learned District Judge, Chamba, District
Chamba, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No.24 of 2016, affirming the
order dated 13.5.2016, passed by learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., in Case No 21-I of
2012, whereby learned trial Court while allowing the petition filed
under Section 12 and 18 of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the
1
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
04/01/2019 23:02:39 :::HCHP
2
“D.V. Act”),directed the petitioner-husband to provide one well
furnished room with WC and kitchen in the locality and to pay
.
maintenance allowance to the tune of Rs. 8000/- per month to the
respondent-wife from the date of order i.e. 13.5.2016, as interim
maintenance.
2. Briefly stated facts, as emerge from the record are
that marriage inter se petitioner-husband and the respondent-wife
was solemnized on 25th February, 2008 at village Mehla, Tehsil
and District Chamba, H.P., as per Hindu Rites and Customs
prevalent in the illaqua. However, fact remains that due to certain
differences, parties referred hereinabove, were unable to live
together for long. In the year, 2011, respondent-wife left her
matrimonial house and started living with her parents at her
parental house. On 16th January, 2012, respondent-wife filed
petition under Section 12 and 18 of D.V. Act, praying therein for
maintenance as well as accommodation to live. Vide interim order
dated 16.3.2012, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate directed the
petitioner to provide one well furnished room with WC and kitchen
in the locality and subsequently vide order dated 13.5.2016 while
confirming its interim order dated 16.3.2012, also directed the
petitioner-husband to pay maintenance allowance to the tune of
04/01/2019 23:02:39 :::HCHP
3
Rs. 8000/- per month to the respondent-wife from the date of the
order.
.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid
order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba,
petitioner-husband preferred an appeal under Section 29 of the
Protection of the Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in the
Court of learned District Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P,
which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 4 th December,
2017, as a consequence of which, order dated 13th May, 2016,
passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba came to be
upheld. In the aforesaid background, petitioner-husband
approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein
to set-aside the judgment passed by the learned District Judge,
whereby he upheld the order dated 13th May, 2016, passed by the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba, granting maintenance
in favour of the respondent-wife.
4. During the proceedings of the case, this Court having
taking taken note of the nature of controversy inter se parties,
deemed it fit to summon both the parties to the Court. After
having interacted with the parties, this Court found that there is no
possibility, if any, of rapprochement inter se parties and their
relation is beyond repair, however on the persuasion of this Court,
04/01/2019 23:02:39 :::HCHP
4
parties agreed to sit with each other, so that some possibility, if
any, of amicable settlement inter se them, is explored. On
.
29.11.2018, learned counsel representing the parties informed
this Court that parties have agreed to resolve their dispute
amicably inter se them, whereby they have mutually agreed to file
joint petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act,
praying therein for dissolution of marriage by way of mutual
consent. This Court was also informed that as per settlement,
petitioner-husband, namely Puneet Bakshi has agreed to pay a
sum of Rs. 10 lac, as permanent alimony to the respondent-wife,
namely Sunila Bakshi. Cheque amounting to Rs. 5 lac came to
be handed over to respondent-wife in the Court itself on
29.11.2018 in terms of the agreement arrived inter se parties,
whereas petitioner-husband agreed to pay remaining amount of
Rs. 5 lac within a period of four weeks. On that date, Mr. Vishal
Panwar, learned counsel representing the respondent-wife stated
that a sum of Rs. 2, 40,000/-, is also payable to the respondent-
wife on account of arrears towards maintenance awarded by the
learned Courts below under various provisions of law. Mr. Sat
Prakash, learned counsel representing the petitioner-husband, on
instructions of his client, stated that he is ready and willing to pay
a sum of Rs. 1 lac in toto qua the areas, if any, which offer was
04/01/2019 23:02:39 :::HCHP
5
accepted by the respondent-wife. With a view to enable the
petitioner-husband to pay remaining amount, matter was
.
adjourned for today i.e. 3.01.2019.
5. Today, during the proceedings of the case, Mr. Sat
Prakash, learned counsel representing the petitioner-husband,
handed over cheque No.671804, dated 3.1.2019, amounting to
Rs. 6 lac( five lac balance amount towards permanent alimony
and Rs. One lac arrears of maintenance) to the respondent-wife,
who is present in Court. He stated that since entire amount
towards alimony now stands paid, learned Court below, where the
divorce petition having been filed by the petitioner-husband is
pending, can be ordered to pass decree of dissolution of
marriage by way of mutual consent.
6. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned counsel representing the
respondent-wife, on instructions of his client, stated that she has
no objection in case the present petition is disposed of with a
direction to the learned Court below to dispose of the divorce
petition having been filed by the petitioner-husband, as has been
prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner-husband.
7. Though, as has been recorded hereinabove, parties
have resolved to settle their dispute amicably, but this Court also
recorded the statements of both the parties on oath in the Court,
04/01/2019 23:02:40 :::HCHP
6
to enable the learned Court below to pass appropriate orders, if
any, on the petition to be filled by both the parties jointly under
.
Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. Both petitioner-husband and
respondent-wife on oath stated before this Court that they of their
own volition and without there being any external pressure have
entered into the compromise inter se each other, whereby they
have agreed that they would be filing joint petition under Section
13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, in the Court of learned Additional
District Judge, seeking therein dissolution of marriage by way of
mutual consent. Smt. Sunila Bakashi, respondent-wife
categorically stated before this Court that she has received a sum
of Rs. 10 lac towards permanent alimony and as such, she has
no claim pending against the petitioner-husband. She further
stated that she will not claim any amount now from the petitioner-
husband, who has also given her Rs. One lac towards arrears of
maintenance in terms of order dated 29.11.2018, passed by this
Court. She also stated that as per the terms and conditions, she
would be withdrawing all the cases registered at her behest
against the petitioner-husband all various Courts of law.
Petitioner-husband also stated on oath that he alongwith
respondent-wife would be filling joint petition in the pending
divorce petition filed by him, to enable the learned Court below to
04/01/2019 23:02:40 :::HCHP
7
pass decree of dissolution of marriage by mutual consent. Their
statements are taken on record.
.
8. Consequently, in view of the above, the present
petition is allowed. The judgment dated 4.12.2017, passed by
learned District Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., in
Criminal Appeal No.24 of 2016 and order dated 13.5.2016,
passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba, District
aside.
r to
Chamba, H.P., in Case No 21-I of 2012, are quashed and set-
9. Both the parties, who are present in Court undertake
to file joint petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act,
within a period of one week. Learned Court below is directed to
decide the joint petition having been filed by both the parties
under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, expeditiously. Both
the parties, who are present in Court, undertake to remain
present before the learned Court below at the time of
presentation of joint petition, so that one date is fixed by the
learned Court below for recording their statements, which has
been otherwise recorded by this Court in the instant proceedings,
which can also be taken note by the learned Court below while
passing the order on the joint petition filed under Section 13-B of
the Hindu Marriage Act. Record, if any, be sent forthwith.
04/01/2019 23:02:40 :::HCHP
8
Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of in
the aforesaid terms alongwith pending application(s), if any.
.
Interim order granted by this Court on 24.3.2018, is vacated.
Copy dasti.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge
3rd January, 2019.
(shankar)
r to
04/01/2019 23:02:40 :::HCHP