Smt. Manjari vs State of Uttarakhand and Another

Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.—Heard Sri Pankaj Purohit, Advocate for the applicant and Sri M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State/Respondent No. 1. None is present for the Respondent No. 2, though service has been effected sufficiently upon her.

During the pendency of the petition moved u/s 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, another miscellaneous application No. 399 of 2008 has been moved on behalf of the Petitioner Smt. Manjari with the prayer that the entire proceedings of criminal case No. 1271 of 2007 Smt. Saroj v. Smt. Manjari u/s 406 Indian Penal Code, 1860, pending in the court of C.J.M. Haridwar be dropped in view of the latest development of agreement between the parties (husband and wife).

This application virtually seeks to achieve the same object which is entailed in the prayer of the original petition. In the petition, the prayer has been made to quash the order of cognizance dated 9.4.2007 passed in the criminal complaint No. 1271 of 2007, Smt. Saroj v. Smt. Manjari for the offence of Section 406 Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The background facts are that Smt. Manjari wedded with Devashish Narendra Lal on 15.5.1989. Their wedded life passed on peacefully for some one and half decade and thereafter the differences between the couple cropped up to the extent of initiation of sundry legal proceedings against each other. Smt. Manjari left to her parents'' house situated in Pune (Maharashtra), so Devashish Narendra Lal filed a suit u/s 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for the restitution of conjugal rights. On the other hand, Smt. Manjari filed a suit for judicial separation in the Family Court at Pune. The mother of Devashish, Smt. Saroj filed the instant complaint No. 1271 of 2007 against her daughter in law Smt. Manjari (applicant) blaming her that she has left her in-laws house with a large chunk of cash and jewellery. So she has committed the breach of trust and the Magistrate, being satisfied with the statements of Sections 200 and 202 Code of Criminal Procedure, took cognizance in the matter and passed the impugned order dated 9.4.2007.

After a fairly long litigation between the two, the compromise was entered, copy of which has been filed here in this Court, which shows that all the matters between the parties have been settled peacefully; the marriage has been dissolved and both are agreed to withdraw the criminal or other legal proceedings initiated by one against the other. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has also shown the decree passed by the court of Family Judge, Pune stating the terms of agreement arrived at between the parties in that Court. These terms indicate the settlement of all disputes between the parties.

6.So, in view of the above and otherwise also, having gone through the contents of complaint, there appears to be No. force in the order of cognizance and the facts, as stated in the complaint filed by Smt. Saroj against her daughter in law Smt. Manjari (applicant), appear to be the quite abuse of process of law, which cannot be permitted to sustain any further.

Accordingly, the C482 petition is allowed. Complaint dated 12.3.2007 and the cognizance order dated 9.4.2007 passed thereupon, both are quashed.