Vikram Ahuja @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors.

,,,

This criminal misc. petition under section 482 CrPC is filed being aggrieved with the order dated 24.08.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Sriganganagar (for short ‘the",,,

revisional court’ hereinafter), whereby it has dismissed the Revision Petition No.53/2017 filed by the petitioner.",,,

The said revision petition was filed by the petitioner against the order dated 28.01.2017 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sriganganagar (for short ‘the trial court’ hereinafter),",,,

whereby it has ordered for framing of charge against the petitioner for the offences punishable under sections 498A and 406 IPC.,,,

Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 filed a complaint in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sriganganagar against the petitioner and three other persons for the offences",,,

punishable under sections 498A, 406 and 323 IPC, whereby the said complaint was forwarded to the Police Station, Mahila, Sriganganagar and on the basis of said complaint, FIR No.131/2013",,,

was registered against the petitioner and three other persons named in the complaint for the offences punishable under sections 406, 498A and 323 IPC.",,,

In the complaint, the respondent No.2 has alleged that her marriage with the petitioner was solemnized on 29.11.2008 at Sriganganagar, where her parents gave ornaments and other articles to",,,

her in-laws as per their demand. It is further alleged that after her marriage with the petitioner both of them started living at Panch Kula, Haryana, where she was harassed and insulted on",,,

account of demand of dowry by petitioner and other persons named in the FIR. Allegations regarding illtreatment given to respondent No.2 during her illness as well as of forcing her to get her,,,

pregnancy terminated have also been levelled.,,,

Police after thorough investigation have filed charge-sheet against the petitioner alone for the offence punishable under sections 498A and 406 IPC. The police have also concluded that there,,,

is no involvement of other persons viz. mother, elder brother and wife of the elder brother of the petitioner in commission of any crime.",,,

The trial court took cognizance against the petitioner for the offences punishable under sections 498A and 406 IPC vide order dated 16.01.2017 and simultaneously also rejected the application,,,

preferred on behalf of the respondent No.2 under section 190 CrPC with a prayer for taking cognizance against the petitioner’s mother, brother and brother’s wife. Thereafter, the trial",,,

court has framed charges against the petitioner for the offences punishable under sections 498A and 406 IPC vide order dated 28.01.2017 against which the petitioner preferred a revision,,,

petition before the revisional court, however, the same has been dismissed.",,,

Being aggrieved with the aforesaid, the petitioner has preferred this criminal misc. petition seeking following reliefs:",,,

“It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned orders dated 28.01.2017 passed by the Chief judicial Magistrate, Sriganganagar and dated",,,

24.08.2017 passed by learned Addl. Session Judge no.1, Sriganganagar May kindly ordered to be quashed and set aside. The criminal proceedings so initiated against the petitioner may kindly",,,

be quashed.,,,

Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.â€​",,,

Before taking into consideration the challenge of the petitioner to the impugned orders, I would like to note some facts in brief, which will demonstrate as to how a litigant can attempt to abuse",,,

the process of court with audacity. It is in respect of respondent No.2 in particular.,,,

This criminal misc. petition was filed on 07.09.2017 and the Registry fixed the date for listing it in Court on 15.09.2017. On 15.09.2017, respondent No.2 was present in person, she asked for a",,,

copy of this petition and this Court ordered for giving a copy of the petition to her and the matter was ordered to be listed on 13.10.2017. On 13.102.2017, the petition was dismissed in",,,

default for want of appearance on behalf of the petitioner. On 13.11.2017, this misc. petition was restored on an application preferred on behalf of the petitioner in the presence of",,,

respondent No.2 and it was listed on,,,

19.12.2017, however, the same was adjourned for 20.12.2017. On 20.12.2017, counsel for the petitioner prayed that the Court may intervene in the matter for resolving all disputes between",,,

the parties. Respondent No.2, who was present in person, did not object to the said submission and, therefore, the Court directed the petitioner to remain present in the Court on the next date",,,

so as to explore the possibility of amicable settlement and fixed the matter to be listed on 04.01.2018. On 04.01.2018, in the presence of the parties, the following order was passed:",,,

“04@01@2018,,,

i{kdkjku bl U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr vknsâ€k fnukad 20-12-2017 ds vuqlj.k esa vkt U;k;ky; esa mifLFkr gSA v;kph ds u pkgus ds ckotwn ;kph us mls ,oa mlds iq= dks ,deqâ€r fuoZgu HkRrk nsus dk",,,

izLrko j[kkA ijUrq] v;kph fdlh Hkh lwjr esa jkthukek djus dk rS;kj ugha gS ,o bl ckr ij n`mijksDr rF;ksa dks ns[krs gq,] bl U;k;ky; dh jk; esa i{kdkjku ds e/; jkthukek gksus dh lEHkkouk ugha gSA vr% ;g fofo/k ;kfpdk xzg.kkFkZ lquokbZ gsrq rkjh[k 18-012018 dks lwphc) gksA",,,

;kph ds vf/koDrk leLr nLrkostkr jsdMZ ij izLrqr djsAâ€​,,,

From the above order, it is clear that the respondent No.2 was not ready for compromise till the decree of divorce is passed on a divorce petition filed by her. The matter was then fixed on",,,

18.01.2018. However, a day prior to listing of the matter i.e. on 17.01.2018, respondent No.2 moved an application before this Court, which is quoted verbatim hereunder:",,,

  “IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN,,,

AT JODHPUR,,,

S.B. Crl. MISC. PETITION NO.3079/2017,,,

(WITH STAY APLICATION NO.3076/2017),,,

Date of Hearing 18.01.2018,,,

APPLR.74/18,,,

Vikram Ahuja               Â,,,

 V/S                                                                           State & Anr.,,,

APPLICATION,,,

To,",,,

THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS COMPANION HON’BLE JUDGES OF THE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JODHPUR.,,,

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS :,,,

Humble Applicant/Respondent No.2 begs to submit that on 20.12.2017 the learned counsel for the petitioner had prayed that the court may intervene in the matter for,,,

resolving all the disputes between the parties but on the next fate of hearing i.e. 04.01.18 the dispute couldn’t be resolved. The applicant/Respondent No.2 has already filed,,,

divorce petition u/s 13(1) HMA and the petitioner has also filed counter claim of divorce at family court sri ganganagar. On conversion of the case U/s 13(A) HMA to case U/s 13(B),,,

HMA with mututal consent the Applicant/Respondent No.2 has apprehension keeping in mind the past cruel conduct of the petitioner, that the petitioner may withdraw his consent",,,

for divorce. In such circumstances the Applicant/Respondent No.2 will be no where and will have irrepairable loss.,,,

According to Applicant/Respondent No.2 only obtaining the decree of divorce will not resolve all the disputes between the parties. The conditions of Applicant/Respondent,,,

No.2 for compromise are as under:-,,,

That the minor son of the Applicant/Respondent No.2 has threat to life from the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and his family. In case the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner Vikram Ahuja withdraws the case No.,,,

37/2017 at Family Court, Sri Ganganagar U/s 25 Guardian and Wards Act read with section 6 Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act and submits the court order to this Hon’ble",,,

Court and also accepts that he will have no right to the custody, guardianship, visita(cid:69)on rights and any other right with respect to the minor child Shivansh and the sole",,,

custody and guardianship of the minor child Shivansh shall vest in the applicant Sonal and the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner will not do any other claims over the minor child under any,,,

circumstances.,,,

That in case the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner Vikram Ahuja and his brother Vishal withdraw all false criminal and civil cases and agree not to file protest pe(cid:69)(cid:69)on in case F.R. is produced in F.I.R,,,

filed by the brother of the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner against the applicant and her family members and submits the court orders to this Hon’ble court and also ensures the Hon’ble,,,

court that no other cases/F.I.R have been filed by the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and his family members and also agrees that he and his family will not file any li(cid:69)ga(cid:69)on, any complaint or any",,,

other application before any authority/court/forum in this regard in future on the Applicant/Respondent No.2 and her family members.,,,

That in case a(cid:72)er the comple(cid:69)on of condi(cid:69)ons in above men(cid:69)oned paragraph no.1 and 2, the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and Applicant/ Respondent no.2 gets decree of divorce with mutual",,,

consent after getting the cooling period of 6 months waived off and submits the decree of divorce to this Hon’ble Court.,,,

In case all the above 3 conditions are fulfiled then the Applicant/Respondent No.2 will not demand maintainance for herself and her son.,,,

Date 16.01.2018,,,

Applicant/Respondent No.2â€​,,,

On 18.01.2018, a copy of the above referred application was provided to the counsel for the petitioner, he prayed for some time to take instructions and the matter was fixed to be listed",,,

on 15.02.2018. On 15.02.2018, the respondent No.2 again moved a revised application, which is reproduced as under:",,,

“IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN,,,

AT JODHPUR,,,

S.B. Crl. MISC. PETITION NO.3079/2017,,,

(WITH STAY APPLICATION NO.3076/2017),,,

Date of Hearing 15.02.2018,,,

Vikram Ahuja                Â,,,

V/SÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â State & Anr.,,,

REVISED APPLICATION,,,

APPLR.177/18,,,

To,",,,

THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS COMPANION HON’BLE JUDGES OF THE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JODHPUR.,,,

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS :,,,

Humble applicant/Respondent No.2 begs to submit that the applicant had submitted an application in the Hon’ble High Court dt. 16.01.2018. The revised application in the,,,

same context on conditions of compromise is as under :-,,,

1.                         Custody/Guardianship/VisitationRights :,,,

i) That the minor son Shivansh of the Applicant/Respondent No.2 has threat to life from the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and his family. The minor son Shivansh has been in the custody and,,,

guardianship of the Applicant/Respondent No.2 since his birth in 2010 while the Present Petitioner has abused and neglected the minor son.,,,

ii) That the Hon’ble High Court is requested to grant the permanent sole custody & guardianship to the Applicant/Respondent No.2 Sonal,,,

iii) That the present pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner leaves the visita(cid:69)on rights and any other right with respect to the minor child Shivansh and will not do any claims over the minor child Shivansh,,,

under any circumstances.,,,

2.              Cases:,,,

i. FIR filed through relative of present petitioner at Sriganganagar,,,

That the present petitioner made his relative (elder brother) file FIR no.393/17, Sadar Thana, Sriganganagar on applicant/ Respondent no.2 and her parents.",,,

Vishal Ahuja vs. Sonal Jasuja and other U/s 384, 417, 420, 467, 471, 120-B in November, 2017. The FIR was filed with an ill intention to get the Applicant/Respondent no.2 and",,,

her senior citizen parents arrested and imprisoned leaving the minor son behind but the police upon investigation found the allegations to be false and submitted FR in the,,,

ACJM-1 Court, Sriganganagar.",,,

ii. Complaint filed through relative of present petitioner at Punjab,,,

That the present petitioner has made his relative (elder brother) file complaint at Malout (Punjab) Complaint No. 82/17 Vishal Kumar vs. Sonal Ahuja U/s 177, 181, 182, 465,",,,

467, 468, 471, 499, 500 IPC at the Court of Ld. Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malout in which next date of hearing is 21.02.2018.",,,

iii. Complaint by present petitioner at CJM Court, Sriganganagar",,,

That the present petitioner has filed a false complaint (complaint No.218/17) in CJM Court, Sriganganagar Vikram Ahuja vs. Sonal U/s 189, 506 IPC.",,,

It cannot be denied that the present petitioner may harass the Applicant/Respondent No.2 and her family even after the compromise by continuing with the criminal cases,,,

and FIR’s that are not in the knowledge of Applicant/Respondent no.2 and also by filing new one’s through his friends and relative so the Hon’ble High Court is,,,

requested to bound the present petitioner to withdraw /compromise and make his relatives and friends also withdraw /compromise in all the cases/complaints/FIR’s,,,

against the Applicant/Respondent No.2 and her family members and submits the court orders to the Hon’ble High Court. The Hon’ble High Court is also requested to,,,

bound the present petitioner so as to not to make his elder brother proceed in filling protest petition in FR at ACJM-1 Court, Sriganganagar and also bound the present",,,

petitioner that he will neither himself file nor file through his relatives and friends new litigation, cases, FIR’s before any authority/court/forum in this regard in future",,,

on applicant/Respondent No.2 and her family members.,,,

3.              Divorce:,,,

i. That according to the order sheet of the Hon’ble High Court dated 04.01.2018 (a(cid:77)achment-1) there was no possibility of compromise but the present pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner gave a false,,,

statement in the Family Court, Sriganganagar sta(cid:69)ng that the Applicant/Respondent No.2 had given assurance of doing compromise and filing applica(cid:69)on U/s 13-B HMA in the",,,

lower Court which is clear from order sheet dt. 08.01.2018 (a(cid:77)achment-2) thus, the present pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner is not even being true to the Hon’ble Courts, so he is not trustable",,,

to cooperate in the grant of decree of divorce.,,,

ii. That the Applicant/Respondent no.2 had filed divorce pe(cid:69)(cid:69)on U/s 13(1) HMA at Family Court, Sriganganagar in 2015. The present pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner had filed counter claim of divorce.",,,

Later the Applicant/Respondent no.2 had filed an applica(cid:69)on on 02.12.2016 reques(cid:69)ng the Family Court, Sriganganagar to grant divorce as both the par(cid:69)es had asked for",,,

divorce. The Family Court, Sriganganagar dismissed the said applica(cid:69)on vide order dt. 10.01.2017. The present pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner filed another applica(cid:69)on on 08.01.2018 sta(cid:69)ng",,,

â€​mijksDr izdj.k esa i{kdkjku dks fookg foPNsn dh fMdzh ikfjr dh tkos“ i.e., in case of contested divorce CM 610/2015 but according to the",,,

order sheet dated 08.01.2018 (a(cid:77)achment-3) of the Family Court, Sriganganagar, the present pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner men(cid:69)oned that he is ready for mutual consent divorce for which he",,,

has given the above men(cid:69)oned applica(cid:69)on U/s 151 C.P.C thus, the present pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner is not trustable. Therefore, the Hon’ble High Court is requested to waive off",,,

cooling period and grant the decree of divorce.,,,

In case all the above conditions are fulfilled then the Applicant/ Respondent No.2 will not demand maintenance for herself and her minor son. In case the conditions are not,,,

fulfilled then there will not be possibility of compromise between the parties. Considering the request of the present petitioner for resolving all the disputes between the,,,

parties and the conditions mentioned above, the Hon’ble High Court is requested to grant divorce to the parties, sole custody and guardianship of the minor child",,,

Shivansh to the Applicant/ Respondent No.2 Sonal, no visitation rights and any other right with respect to minor child Shivansh to the present petitioner and bound the",,,

present petitioner from doing any claims over the minor child Shivansh under any circumstances, bound the present petitioner to himself withdraw/compromise and also get",,,

cases, FIR’s withdrawn/ compromised by his relatives/friends and also bound not to file and not to make his relatives and friends file new cases and FIR’s on",,,

Applicant/Respondent no.2 and her family members. The Applicant/Respondent no.2 will be greatly obliged.,,,

Attachments,,,

Web copy of order dt. 04.01.2018 of the Hon’ble High Court,,,

Certified copy of Order Sheet of Family Court,",,,

Sriganganagar dt. 08.01.2018.,,,

Certified copy of application of present petitioner dt.,,,

08.01.2018.,,,

Date: 14.02.2018,,,

                 Humble Applicant/Respondent no.2,,,

                                                                       Sd/-,,,

                                                                       Sonalâ€​,,,

Â,,,

On 15.02.2018, counsel for the petitioner prayed for some time and the matter was fixed for 15.03.2018, however, on 14.03.2018, the respondent No.2",,,

moved an application requesting to direct the petitioner to submit the “IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN,,,

AT JODHPUR,,,

S.B. CRL. MISC. PETITION NO.3079/2017,,,

(With Stay Application No.3076/2017),,,

Date of Hearing 15.03.2018,,,

Filing,U/s,Title,Court

complaint

no.82/17","177, 181,

182, 465,

467, 468,

471, 499,

500 IPC","Vishal

Ahuja

Vs.

Sonal

Ahuja","Court of Ld. Sub divisional

Judicial Magistrate Malout

(Punjab)

FIR No. 393/17

Sadar

Thana

Sriganganaga r,

Case No. 27/18,

FR no.

81/18","384, 417,

420, 467,

468, 471,

120 B IPC","Vishal

Ahuja

Vs.

Sonal

Jasuja

&

Other s",ACJM-1 Court Sriganganagar

Complaint

No.218/17","189, 506 IPC","Vikra

m

Ahuja

Vs.

Sonal",CJm Court Sriganganagar

CM 37/17,"25 Guardian & Wards act read

with section 6

Hindu

Minority &

Guardianship

Act","Vikra

m

Ahuja

Vs.

Sonal",Family Court Sriganganagar

CM 610/15,"Counter

Claim   Â

              Â

of divorce U/s 13(1) HMA","Sonal

vs.

Vikra

m

Ahuja",Family Court Sriganganagar

That the complaint no. 82/17 at Ld. sub divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malout (Punjab) is out of jurisdic(cid:69)on of this Hon’ble Court so",,,

an ac(cid:69)on plan of the Present Pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner for ge(cid:80)ng the complaint withdrawn from his brother Vishal Ahuja and filing the cer(cid:69)fied,,,

copy of the court order to this Hon’ble Court is to be men(cid:69)oned by the Present Pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner further affidavit from the brother of,,,

the Present Pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner Vishal Ahuja is required regarding men(cid:69)oning his ac(cid:69)on plan of compromising/withdrawing/ge(cid:80)ng,,,

quashed all cases/complaints/FIRs against the Respondent no.2 & her family members & a commitment about not filing any,,,

cases/ complaints/ FIRs on Respondent No.2 and her family members in future.,,,

That it is humble request that the Present Pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner be directed to give an affidavit to this Hon’ble Court about the complete list,,,

of cases, complaints & FiRs filed by the Present Pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner, his rela(cid:69)ves & friends on the Respondent No.2 & her family Members",,,

and detailed date wise ac(cid:69)on plan to withdraw/compromise/get/ FIRs quashed. The Present Pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner also needs to disclose his,,,

steps about his commitment for not filing & not making his rela(cid:69)ve & friends file any new cases/complaints/FIRs against the,,,

Respondent No.2 & her family members.,,,

That a(cid:72)er the ac(cid:69)on plan of Custody, Guardianship, Visita(cid:69)on Rights etc. issues and a(cid:72)er the ac(cid:69)on plan for withdrawal of cases, FIRs",,,

and complaints against the Respondent No.2 & her family members, finally ac(cid:69)on plan to cooperate for divorce without cooling",,,

period is to be disclosed & the date of submitting the decree of Divorce to this Hon’ble Court is to be mentioned.,,,

It is humble request in the interest of justice to the Hon’ble High Court to keep the criminal misc. petition pending and take the,,,

date-wise action plan for compromising form the Present Petitioner in writing in the absence of which any compromise is not possible. It is,,,

also requested that the next date of hearing be given after a month as the Respondent No.2 needs to come along with her father/mother,,,

from Sriganganagar, the remote corner of Rajasthan. Respondent No.2 shall be greatly obliged.",,,

Attachment :,,,

Certified Copy of Final Report in false FIR lodged by the brother of the Present Petitioner.,,,

Date: 9.04.2018,,,

HUMBLE APPLICANT/RESPONDENT NO.2,,,

Sd/-,,,

(SONAL)â€​,,,

Pursuant to the order dated 09.04.2018, the matter was listed on 09.05.2018 and on that date, respondent No.2 filed her written arguments in detail.",,,

However, the case was adjourned for 09.07.2018.",,,

In the meantime, the Family Court, Sriganganagar granted decree of divorce to the respondent No.2 vide judgment dated 21.04.2018.",,,

Thereafter on 12.06.2018, the petitioner filed reply to the application and revised application filed by respondent No.2. The same is quoted as under:",,,

“IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN,,,

AT JODHPUR,,,

S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.3079/17,,,

                                                                   Â,,,

PETITIONERÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â RESPONDENT,,,

                                                                         Vikram,,,

Ahuja                                v/s                                State of Rajasthan & anr,,,

Reply to the application/consent for conditions mentioned in application of respondent no.2 (complainant) & revised application,,,

TO,",,,

THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS OTHER COMPANION JUDGES OF THE HIGH COURT OF,,,

JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR,,,

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS;,,,

On behalf of humble petitioner it is most respectfully submitted as under:-,,,

That the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner is ready to fulfill the first condi(cid:69)on, and ready to withdraw the case no.37/2017 at Family Court Sriganganagar u/s 25",,,

Guardian & Wards Act r/w s. 6 Hindu minority and Guardianship Act and ready to submit the court’s order and also accepts that the,,,

petitioner will have no right to the custody,",,,

Guardianships, Visitation right and any other right with respect to his minor child Shivansh & sole custody and guardianship of minor",,,

Shivansh shall vest in the respondent no.2 Sonal & petitioner will not do any other claim over the minor child under any circumstances &,,,

petitioner also want to assure that there was no former threat to life to respondent no.2 & minor Son from petitioner and his family.,,,

That the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner is ready to fulfill the second condi(cid:69)on men(cid:69)oned in the applica(cid:69)on ready that the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner Vikram Ahuja and his,,,

brother Vishal Ahuja will withdraw all criminal & civil cases and agree that they will not file protest pe(cid:69)(cid:69)on in case F.R.is produced in F.I.R,,,

filed by the brother of the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner against the applicant respondent no.2 and her family members and submit the court’s order to,,,

this Hon’ble court and also ensures that no other cases/FIR have been filed by the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and his family members and also agree,,,

that the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and his family will not file any li(cid:69)ga(cid:69)on, any complaint or any other applica(cid:69)on before any authority/court/forum in",,,

this regard in future on the Applicant/Respondent no.2 and her family members.& the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner further want to assure that no false case,,,

was previously filed and in future will not be filed.,,,

That the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner is already consented to complete the condi(cid:69)ons men(cid:69)on in the paragraph no.1 & 2 of the applica(cid:69)on of the respondent,,,

no.2 and he was ready to get divorce with mutual consent and he was ready to submit the decree of divorce to this Hon’ble court, but in",,,

the change in circumstances it is noteworthy to men(cid:69)on here that learned Family court Sriganganagar has already passed the decree of,,,

Divorce while allowing the applica(cid:69)on of the respondent Sonal & the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner undertakes that he will not challenge it further if the all,,,

disputes & cases settled mutually.,,,

REPLY TO THE REVISED APPLICATION,,,

Humble petitioner respectfully submits paragraph wise reply to the revised application as under:,,,

1.(i) That since the all matters are going to be amicably settled between the petitioner and respondent no.2, the petitioner & his family",,,

himself do not want to create any controversy regarding truthfulness of any former fact & do not want to comment anything which can,,,

unpleasant to the respondent no.2.,,,

(ii) That since the all ma(cid:77)ers are going to be amicably se(cid:77)ledbetween the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and respondent no.2, the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner is ready to fulfill first",,,

condi(cid:69)on and agrees in case Hon’ble court grants permanent sole custody & guardianship of his minor son Shivansh to the,,,

applicant/Respondent no.2 sonal.,,,

(iii) That since the all ma(cid:77)ers are going to be amicably se(cid:77)ledbetween the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and respondent no.2, the present pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner ready to leave",,,

the visita(cid:69)on rights and any other right with respect to the minor child Shivansh and will not do any claim over the minor child Shivansh,,,

under any circumstances.,,,

That since the all ma(cid:77)ers are going to be amicably se(cid:77)led between the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and respondent no.2, all the cases men(cid:69)oned in sub-para",,,

(i),(ii),(iii) will be withdrawn/compromised & ensure that the elder brother of the petitioner will not proceed in filling protest.",,,

That since the all ma(cid:77)ers are going to be amicably se(cid:77)led between the pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and respondent no.2 without going in to the dispute,,,

Filings,Title,Court,"Next Date of

Hearing

Complaint No.218/2017,"Vikram Ahuja vs.

Sonal","CJMÂ Â Â Â Â Â

      Court,

Sriganganagar",07.07.2018

Divorce    Â

    appeal

period",,,Till 21.07.2018

Complaint no.82/2017,"Vishal Kumar vs.

Sonal Ahuja","Ld. Sub. Divisional

Judicial Magistrate,

Malout Punjab",23.07.2018

CM 37/17,"Vikarm Ahuja vs.

Sonal","Family    Â

    Court,

Sriganganagar",26.07.2018

F.R. No.81/2018 in

Case no. 27/2018

(FIR No.393/2017

Sadar      Â

      Thana,

Sriganganagar)","Vishal Ahuja vs.

Sonal jasuja and

others","ACJM 1 Court,

Sriganganagar",03.08.2018

Any other cases by,,,

the       Â

       Â

Present

Petitioner and his

Family Members on the

respondent No.2 and

her family members",,,

Withdraws complaint

no.82/2017","Vishal Kumar vs.

Sonal Ahuja","Ld.Sub.divisional

Judicial Magistrate,

Malout Punjab",23.07.2018

Withdraw CM 37/2017 and

submits court orders and

affidavit to this Hon’ble

court on next date of

hearing","Vikaram Ahuja

vs. Sonal","Family    Â

     Court

Sriganganagar",26.07.2018

Accepts F.R. No.81/2018 in

case no.27/2018 (FIR

No.393/17","Vishal Ahuja vs.

Sonal Jasuja and

others","ACJM 1 Court

Sriganganagar",03.08.2018

Sadar Thana,

Sriganganagar",,,

Withdraws complaint

no.218/2017","Vikram Ahuja vs.

Sonal","CJMÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â

      Â

Court

Sriganganagar",26.09.2018

Does not challenge/ file

appeal again decree of

divorce & give the

affidavit",,,"on next date of

hearing at

Hon’ble

High Court

Withdraws

any    Â

          Â

other cases by the Present

petitioner and

his      Â

          Â

Family Members on the

respondent No.2 and her

family members",,,"Files Certified

copy of Court

Orders and

affidavits On

next Date of

hearing at High

Court

Withdraws all complaints,

FIR by self and bother and

submit certified copy of

court orders and affidavits",,,"On next Date of

hearing at High

Court

S.No.,Reg. No.,Reg.Date,

1.,APPLR 74/2018,17/1/2018,

2.,APPLR 177/2018,15/2/2018,

3.,APPLR 252/2018,14/3/2018,

4.,APPLR 316/2018,9/4/2018,

5.,Written Arguments 14501/2018,2/7/2018,

6.,Written Arguments 14502/2018,9/7/2018,

vizkFkhZ;k dh gj “krZ ekuus dks igys,,,

Hkh rS;kj Fkk vkSj vkt Hkh rS;kj gSâ€​ (Certified copy attached) The present petitioner in his reply to Hon’ble High Court dated,,,

12-06-2018 has mentioned is the last para that he is ready to settle amicably all the matters and ready and willing to fulfill all the condition,,,

mentioned in application and revised application. According to the present petitioner he is ready to fulfill the conditions of compromise,,,

so the Hon’ble Court passed order dt 9/7/2018, the compliance of which is yet to be started by the Present Petitioner.",,,

That if the Present Petitioner files appeal against the decree of divorce, the Respondent No.2 will again be facing harassment.",,,

That the minor child Shivansh has threat to life from the,,,

Present Petitioner and his family members. In case the Present Petitioner does not surrender Custody, guardianship and Visitation",,,

Rights and any other right with respect to the minor child Shivansh, the life of the minor child will not be safe.",,,

That if the Present Pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner and his brother Vishal Ahuja do not give affidavit that they have withdrawn all the cases and will not file any,,,

new cases, FIRs, li(cid:69)ga(cid:69)on against the Respondent no.2 & her family members, they will be free to file new cases and harass the",,,

Respondent No.2 and her family members.,,,

That the Present Pe(cid:69)(cid:69)oner had a(cid:77)ached an affidavit with his reply dt.12/6/18 men(cid:69)oning that the cases will be withdrawn by his brother,,,

.The Present Petitioner has not given any affidavit of withdrawing cases filed by himself.,,,

Further the affdavit does not mentioned no.of S.B.Crim.Misc.Petition with which it is associated and also depicts wrong year 2018 instead,,,

of writing S.B. Crim. Petition No. 3079/2017. There is also no mention of date on which the affidavit was sworn.,,,

It is a humble request that the present petitioner be directed to fulfill all the conditions of compromise of respondent No. 2 as mentioned,,,

in her applications and written arguments as detailed in above paragraph1 and directions may kindly be given to the Present Petitioner to,,,

himself file and get filed proper affidavits from his brother. After all the conditions of compromise are met with, the compromise arrived",,,

at between the parties with their free will, without any force and corection need to be reduced to writing & to be singed in the presence",,,

of witnesses and all the parties be remain bound by the settlement/compromise and abide by the same and do not withdraw from the,,,

compromise in any situation and circumstances. The compromise arrived at needs to be filed in the Hon’ble High Court. In case the,,,

present petitioner does not fulfill all the conditions of compromise of respondent No.2, the respondent No. 2 is not ready for any",,,

compromise. In the absence of settlement of entire matrimonial dispute the quashing of FIR under section 498A, 406 IPC is requested not",,,

to be done and it is requested that the written arguments of respondent No.2 (Inward No. 5734/18), documents (Inward No.14500/17),",,,

Certified copies (Inward No.5720/18), along with citations and wedding card be taken into consideration and present Crlmp No. 3079/17,",,,

kindly be dismissed and trial court be directed to do speedy trial and impart justice the respondent No.2.,,,

Date-19-07-2018,,,

Humble Applicant/,,,

Respondent No.2,,,

Attachments with Fard Talbana:,,,

Certified copy of tokc izkFkZuk        Â,,,

i= dt. 07-06-2018 of Family Court, Sd/-",,,

Shriganganagar (Sonal),,,

Postal receipts-6 No.sâ€​,,,

Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 09.07.2018, the petitioner and his relatives withdrew all the cases",,,

filed by them against the respondent No.2 and her parents and submitted certified copies of the orders before this Court along,,,

with the affidavits of him, his elder brother and mother. The affidavit of petitioner-Vikram Ahuja is reproduced as under:",,,

“IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Crl. MISC. PETITION,,,

NO.3079/2017,,,

(WITH STAY APPLICATION NO.3076/2017) Date of Hearing 09.08.2017,,,

Vikram Ahuja                      V/s                      State & Anr.,,,

AFFIDAVIT,,,

I, Vikram Ahuja S/o Late Shri Sudharsh Ahuja, B/c Arora aged about 42 years, Resident of Malout (Punjab) At present House No.405, First",,,

Floor, Sec.4 Panch Kula (Haryana), do hereby state on oath as under:-",,,

That I have withdrawn the petition No.37/2017 pending before the family court Sri Ganganagar.,,,

That I have withdrawn the complaint No.218/71 in the court of CJM Sri Ganganagat against the Res. No.2.,,,

That I have withdrawn all the cases against the respondent No.2 & her Family members and no other cases FIR complaints have been filed by,,,

deponent.,,,

That I will not file new li(cid:69)ga(cid:69)on, complaint or any other applica(cid:69)on before any authority /Court/ Form in the regard in future on the",,,

respondent No.2 and her family members.,,,

That I have withdrawn the custody, guardianship visita(cid:69)on rights any other right with respect to the minor child Shivnash and the permant",,,

sole custody and guardianship of the minor child Shivansh shall vest in respondent No.2.,,,

That I will not do any other claim/Demand over the minor child under any circumstances whatever it may be in future also.,,,

That I will not challenged the order granted by the Family Court Sri Ganganagar.,,,

Sd/,,,

DEPONENT VERIFICATION:,,,

I, the above-named deponent do hereby verify on oath that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct. Nothing has been",,,

concealed and no part of it is false. So help me God.,,,

Sd/,,,

DEPONENTâ€​,,,

The affidavit of Vishal Ahuja, elder brother of",,,

petitioner Vikram Ahuja is reproduced as under:,,,

“IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR,,,

S.B.Crl. MISC. PETITION NO.3079/2017,,,

(WITH STAY APPLICATION NO.3076/2017) Date of Hearing 09.08.2017,,,

                                                                          Vikram Ahuja,,,

                                             V/s                           State & Anr.,,,

AFFIDAVIT,,,

I, Vishal Ahuja S/o Late Shri Sudhash Ahuja, B/c Arora, Aged abour 44 years, Resident of Surja Ram Market Malout (Punjab) do hereby state on oath",,,

as under:-,,,

That I have withdrawn th complaint No.82/17 Pending in the court of SDJM Malout (Punjab).,,,

That I have withdrawn the FR No.81/2018 arising out of FIR No.393/17 Police station Sadar Sri Ganganagar.,,,

That I have withdrawn all the cases against the respondent No.2 & her family members and no other cases FIR complaints have been filed by,,,

deponent.,,,

That I will not file new li(cid:69)ga(cid:69)on, complaint or any other applica(cid:69)on before any authority/Court/Form in the regard in future on the",,,

respondent No.2 and her family members.,,,

Sd/,,,

DEPONENT VERIFICATION,,,

I, the above-named deponent do hereby verify on oath that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct. Nothing has been",,,

concealed and no part of it is false. So help me God.,,,

    Sd/,,,

DEPONENTâ€​,,,

The affidavit of Kamlesh, mother of petitioner",,,

Vikram Ahuja is reproduced as under:,,,

“IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR,,,

S.B. Crl. MISC. PETITION NO.3079/2017,,,

(WITH STAY APPLICATION NO.3076/2017) Date of Hearing 09.08.2017,,,

                                                                                             Â,,,

Vikram Ahuja                                        v/s           State & Anr.,,,

AFFIDAVIT,,,

I, Kamlesh W/o late Shri Sudharsh Ahuja, B/c Arora, aged about 67 years, Resident of Surja Ram Market Malout",,,

(Punjab) do hereby state on oath as under:-,,,

That I have not file any Complaint, Fir, Petition against the respondent No.2 & her Family members.",,,

That I will not file new li(cid:69)ga(cid:69)on, complaint or any other applica(cid:69)on before any authority/Court/ Form in the regard in future on the",,,

respondent No.2 and her family members.,,,

Sd/,,,

DEPONENT VERIFICATION:,,,

I, the above-named deponent do hereby verify on oath that the contents of my above affidavit are tyrue and correct. Nothing has",,,

been concealed and no part of it is false.,,,

So help me God.,,,

Sd/,,,

DEPONENTâ€​,,,

From the above facts, it is clear that all the cases filed by the petitioner, his brother and mother against the",,,

respondent No.2 and her parents have already been withdrawn. The petitioner has given an undertaking to this effect that he,,,

would not file any appeal against the decree of divorce granted in favour of respondent No.2 by the Family Court, Sriganganagar",,,

on 21.04.2018. He has also given an undertaking to this effect that he would not file any criminal case against the respondent,,,

No.2 or her relatives. The brother and mother of the petitioner have also filed similar undertakings before this Court, which are",,,

quoted earlier. The certified copies of all the cases filed on behalf of the petitioner and his relatives are already produced before,,,

this Court and from the above, it is clear that the conditions put forth by the respondent No.2 in various applications referred",,,

above have already been,,,

fulfilled.,,,

It is very strange that on 09.08.2018 when this criminal misc. petition came up for hearing, the respondent No.2",,,

informed this Court that she has already moved an application on 08.08.2018 and is not ready for compromise on any terms. She,,,

has raised objections in respect of one affidavit filed by the petitioner on 17.06.2018 before this Court while pointing out certain,,,

defects in the said affidavits i.e. number of this criminal misc. petition is not written and the same does not refer about visitation,,,

rights, withdrawal of cases of present petitioner etc. She has also stated that as the petitioner has made some false statements",,,

regarding return of ‘Stridhan’ etc. she is not ready for any compromise and does not give her consent for compromise.,,,

From the order-sheets of this criminal misc.,,,

petition, it is clear that on each and every date, the respondent No.2 remained present before this Court. This matter has been",,,

listing before me from March, 2018 and I distinctly remember that on every date the respondent No.2 has specifically stated that",,,

she is ready for compromise if all the criminal cases filed by the petitioner and his brother are withdrawn and the petitioner,,,

waives his visitation rights and any other rights with respect to his son, however, when all the conditions on which the",,,

respondent No.2 was insisting have been fulfilled, she has filed an application on 08.08.2018 refusing to compromise the matter.",,,

In the opinion of the Court such conduct of a litigant cannot be appreciated and is a clear case of abuse the process of court.,,,

It appears that on 08.08.2018, the respondent No.2 was very well aware about the fact that all the criminal cases",,,

including the application seeking guardianship and custody of minor child, born out from the wedlock of petitioner and respondent",,,

No.2 have been dismissed as withdrawn and then she filed application, raising frivolous grounds regarding defect in the affidavits",,,

submitted earlier by the petitioner claiming that false statements have been made by the petitioner. In the opinion of the,,,

Court, a litigant, who first agrees for compromise in a matrimonial dispute on certain conditions, cannot repudiate from his/her",,,

agreement to compromise the same after those conditions are fulfilled by other party.,,,

It seems that the intention of the respondent No.2 is to harass the petitioner and his family members even after,,,

withdrawal of all the cases instituted at their instance in criminal courts. The respondent No.2 has failed to establish that any,,,

other case instituted at the instance of the petitioner or his family is pending against her or her parents in any court of law. The,,,

above noted conduct of the respondent No.2 indicates that she is attempting to abuse the process of Court.,,,

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has come down,,,

heavily on the litigants who attempt to abuse the process,,,

in Dnyandeo Sabaji Naik and Anr. vs. Pradnya Prakash Khadekar and Ors., (2017) 5 SCC 496,",,,

wherein it has been held as under:,,,

“13. This Court must view with disfavour any attempt by a litigant to abuse the process. The sanctity of the judicial process will,,,

be seriously eroded if such attempts are not dealt with firmly. A litigant who takes liberties with the truth or with the procedures,,,

of the Court should be left in no doubt about the consequences to follow. Others should not venture along the same path in the,,,

hope or on a misplaced expectation of judicial leniency. Exemplary costs are inevitable, and even necessary, in order to ensure",,,

that in litigation, as in the law which is practised in our country, there is no premium on the truth.",,,

Courts across the legal system - this Court not being an exception â€" are choked with litigation. Frivolous and groundless,,,

filings constitute a serious menace to the administration of justice. They consume time and clog the infrastructure. Productive,,,

resources which should be deployed in the handling of genuine causes are dissipated in attending to cases filed only to benefit,,,

from delay, by prolonging dead issues and pursuing worthless causes. No litigant can have a vested interest in delay.",,,

Unfortunately, as the present case exemplifies, the process of dispensing justice is misused by the unscrupulous to the detriment",,,

of the legitimate. The present case is an illustration of how a simple issue has occupied the time of the courts and of how,,,

successive applications have been filed to prolong the inevitable. The person in whose favour the balance of justice lies has in,,,

the process been left in the lurch by repeated attempts to revive a stale issue. This tendency can be curbed only if courts across,,,

the system adopt an institutional approach which penalizes such behavior. Liberal access to justice does not mean access to chaos,,,

and indiscipline. A strong message must be conveyed that courts of justice will not be allowed to be disrupted by litigative,,,

strategies designed to profit from the delays of the law. Unless remedial action is taken by all courts here and now our society,,,

will breed a legal culture based on evasion instead of abidance. It is the duty of every court to firmly deal with such situations.,,,

The imposition of exemplary costs is a necessary instrument which has to be deployed to weed out, as well as to prevent the",,,

filing of frivolous cases. It is only then that the courts can set apart time to resolve genuine causes and answer the concerns of,,,

those who are in need of justice. Imposition of real time costs is also necessary to ensure that access to courts is available to,,,

citizens with genuine grievances. Otherwise, the doors would be shut to legitimate causes simply by the weight of undeserving",,,

cases which flood the system. Such a situation cannot be allowed to come to pass. Hence it is not merely a matter of discretion,,,

but a duty and obligation cast upon all courts to ensure that the legal system is not exploited by those who use the forms of the,,,

law to defeat or delay justice. We commend all courts to deal with frivolous filings in the same manner.â€​,,,

I am of the firm opinion that it is a fit case where strict action is required to be taken against the respondent No.2 but taking into consideration that the parents of her are of old age and she,,,

is also having responsibility of a minor son, I restrain myself from passing any order against respondent No.2 but she is warned not to attempt to abuse the process of courts in future.",,,

Otherwise also, I have gone through the material collected by the police during the course of investigation, wherein the police have found prima facie case against the petitioner for the",,,

offences punishable under sections 498A and 406 IPC.,,,

Admittedly, the marriage of the petitioner and respondent No.2 was solemnized on 25.11.2008 at Sriganganagar, thereafter the respondent No.2 stayed for about 7 days at her in-laws house in",,,

Malout, Punjab and thereafter they left for Panch Kula (Haryana), where the petitioner was doing his business. They went to Kerala and Mumbai for honeymoon and started living at Panch",,,

Kula (Haryana). The respondent No.2 has alleged in her complaint that the petitioner demanded dowry from her while residing at Panch Kula. She has also alleged that the petitioner’s,,,

mother, his elder brother and wife of his elder brother had also demanded dowry from her, however the said allegation of the respondent No.2 was not found true by the police and,",,,

therefore, no charge-sheet has been filed against those persons.",,,

It is also to be noticed that the respondent No.2 filed an application under section 190 CrPC before the trial court requesting for taking cognizance against the petitioner’s mother and elder,,,

brother and his wife, however, the said application was rejected by the trial court by passing a detailed order on 16.01.2017 with the observations that there is no evidence available on record",,,

to suggest that the said persons demanded dowry either from the respondent No.2 or her parents.,,,

In her statement recorded by the police under section 161 CrPC, the respondent No.2 has alleged that all the persons named in the complaint have treated her with cruelty but no specific",,,

allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. She has also not stated that the petitioner ever demanded dowry at Sriganganagar.,,,

So far as ‘Stridhan’ of the respondent No.2 is concerned, it is noticed that respondent No.2 in her police statements recorded on 21.06.2013 has admitted that “eSaus iapk;r esa",,,

esjs ifr ls esjs tsojkr tks esjs ekrk firk us fn;s Fks o esjh dkj tks eq>s ngst esa feyh Fkh ;s eSaus izkIr dj fy;s gSAâ€. Though, she has further stated that the ‘Stridhan’ given to her by her",,,

inlaws has not been returned to her. The father and mother of the respondent No.2 in their statements recorded before the police have also admitted that during Panchayat, the ornaments",,,

and a car which were given in the dowry, were returned to them but they have also insisted that the other household items have not been returned to her.",,,

During the course of investigation, the police recorded the statements of several persons, who have stated that on 09.03.2011, a meeting of Panchayat was convened in Fazilka, Punjab, where",,,

in the presence of father and maternal uncle of the respondent No.2 and in the presence of the petitioner and his some relatives, all the dowry items and ornaments were handed over to the",,,

father of the respondent No.2 and receipt whereof has also been given by her father.,,,

From the above, it can be gathered that ‘Stridhan’ of respondent No.2 was returned in March, 2011 itself i.e. much before filing of the complaint.",,,

Taking into consideration the above facts, I am of the opinion that sufficient material is not available on record to frame charges against the petitioner under section 498A and 406 IPC.",,,

Having taken into consideration the material available on record and the compromise proceedings taken place between the parties before this Court and other facts and circumstances of the,,,

case, this criminal misc. petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 24.08.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Sriganganagar and the order dated 28.01.2017 passed by",,,

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sriganganagar are set aside. The proceedings pending against the petitioner in Cr.Case No.12/2016 pending before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,",,,

Sriganganagar are terminated.,,,

All the applications filed by respective parties are disposed of.,,,