Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA) 31 December 2011

Exactly my point Sanjeev,

Don't rush into it, when you can wait for a couple of months for life long peace.

Regards,

Shonee Kapoor

harassed.by.498a@gmail.com

ravindra (Analyst) 02 January 2012

Hi Just got from google - How to withdraw IPC 498A?

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1579 and 1578 of 2011

COMMON ORDER:

Since the parties in both the criminal petitions are one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order.

The petitioners approach the Court with a prayer to quash the proceedings against them in P.R.C.No.9 of 2010 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 498-A, 420, 406,495 read with 34 of IPC and 3, 4 and 6(2) of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and in D.V.C.No.15 of 2009 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

2. Heard both sides.

3. Today, the de facto complainant – Baru Andela Madhurima and the revision petitioners-accused are present. She filed her driving licence card bearing No.DLFAP03773692004 in proof of her identity. Petitioners filed affidavit given by the complainant, wherein the complainant stated that the matter is settled between herself and the accused with some terms and conditions, which runs as follows:

i. That the petitioners shall pay Rs.8,00,000/-(Rupees eight lakhs only) towards full and final settlement including permanent alimony;

ii. Out of the said amount, Rs.50,000/- was already paid in cash and the remaining amount of Rs.7,50,000/-(Rupees seven lakhs fifty thousand only) was paid by way of D.D. No.006668 drawn on HDFC Bank, Jubilee Hills Branch, Hyderabad;

iii. both the parties agreed to take divorce with mutual consent and that they have no further disputes or differences whatsoever against each other.

iv. That the parties hereby withdraw all the allegations made against each other; and

v. That the complainant agrees to quash the proceedings against the accused in P.R.C.No.9 of 2010 on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, arising out of Cr.No.497 of 2009 of III Town Police Station, and in D.V.C.No.15 of 2009 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

It is reported by the complainant that the matter is settled out of court between herself and her husband and prays to acquit the accused.

4. The matter arises out of matrimonial disputes and the complainant herself reported that the matter is settled. In view of the same, this Court is of the view that further proceedings in both the matters would not be of no use. Hence, the proceedings in P.R.C.No.9 of 2010 on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, arising out of Cr.No.497 of 2009 of III Town Police Station, and in D.V.C.No.15 of 2009 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, are hereby quashed.

_______________

RAJA ELANGO, J.

1^st February 2011,

Rns.

* * * * * *

In a case involving dowry harassment under S.498A and the criminal petition itself had been filed stating that the second respondent and the elders of both the families have settled the matter agreeing to withdraw criminal case. The second respondent stated before the Court that she compromised the matter and compounded the offences and hence, the further proceedings may be quashed. The documentation showed that the disputes were purely personal in nature not involving any public policy. In view of the compromise, it was held that any continuance of the prosecution would be a futile exercise. The inherent powers were invoked to secure the ends of justice. The proceedings were quashed and criminal petition was allowed.

In my opinion even though the offence under S.498A is compoundable in Andhra Pradesh; the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate refers the case to the Lok Adalat(which does not have powers to decide non-compoundable cases) because if they compound it - it is appeal able in High Court. Lok Adalat has powers to decide compoundable cases but they don’t. They deal only in civil matters like divorce, custody or other family reconciliation issues. They in turn suggest to proceed to High Court for quash so that appeal or other irregularities can be rectified.

The HC Judge asks for identification, affidavit from the complainant and then proceeds to order as aforesaid.

Lok Adalat is merely a compromising place. A mediation centre; where the parties agree to some mutually acceptable terms and the agreement is drafted by the mediator and forwarded to court for settlement under S.89 of CPC. Thats it. Any disagreement is also forwarded/returned to court referring the subject matter, if one party disagrees. Thereafter, it is as usual adjudicated court matter. For details check S.89, Rule 1A, 1B, 1C,1D and order XXXII A, rule 3A, 3B, 3C of Civil Procedure Code, 1999 & 2002 amendment acts.

Thanks

Ravindra Sonavane

wifebetrayed (service) 03 January 2012

this is nice example of sale of law.

if 498a is filed it is case bw husband and state then on what ground it can be quased baisis money exchange with wife

Sammelan Kavi (Software) 04 January 2012

Sneha, since you wrote that if your hubby signs MCD and then does not come to hearings, you can call it as "betrayal of trust". You may be 100% correct in coming to such an conclusion....

However, given that you seem logical, intelligent and coming to reasonable conclusions, did you not know that entering into Marriage was a life-time commitment sans all reasons. Since you are not honoring it (for whatever reason) does it not also mean that you are also betraying his trust? This is just a food for thought. I do not really need you to answer this.

Sneha, unless you like the idea of paying lawyers for all your life and making lawyers rich at your expense, do not sign MCD with some deceptive intent as recommended by Shri Ratnesh Kumar.

Ratnesh Kumar, Advocates like you who teach client to sign an mutual compromise agreement with a deceptive intent must be Smoked out of the profession. Please share all your details and I will do the needful at the appropriate Bar Council.

I have taken the print out of these comments and will be doing needful.

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA) 05 January 2012

Kavi Sammelan, Shaant Gadadhaari Bheem Shaant.

This is the practise of that court and doesnot has to do with the doings of Ld. Ratnesh Kumar.

Regards,

Shonee Kapoor

harassed.by.498a@gmail.com.

kvss.prabhakar rao (Advocate ) 21 January 2012

Except in State of Anhdra Pradesh no where in India the sec 498-A is non compoundable one. the state of Andhra pradesh amended the sec 498-A making all who wish to withdraw the case agsingt her inlaws. The Andhra Pradesh amned the same about 10 years back. But it flexible to person who filed case with incompatble reaosn the person who wihses to continue thier matrimonial realtionship. I request all advocate the suggest the Goverment concern to make the emanble to amend the same. Becuae it is social crime it is alone to one. It effect the soceity at large.

Format 498 a case withdrawal

CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1579 and 1578 of 2011

Leave a reply

Recent Topics

Related Threads

Popular Discussion

Browse by Category