Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants in a matrimonial case involving Section 498A IPC citing a successful settlement between parties.
Applicants released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial with conditions including non-exit from India, surrender of passport, and presence on court dates.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 70
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7119 of 2024
Applicant :- Smt Sarita Alias Dhanwanti And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Giri Ram Rawat,Indra Deo Mishra,Sangeeta Yadav,Shri Ram (Rawat) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
"7. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:-
a) That the Applicant No.2 and O.P. No.3 have agreed to dissovle their marriage by filing a joint petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act.
That the parties have earlier also entered into a settlement and in consequence whereof they have filed a petition under Seection 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act bearing No.364/2024 pending in the Family Court, Firozabad. The first motion of the aforesaid petition had already taken place and now the matter is fixed for second motion on 08.11.2024. The parties agreed that they shall not resile from this proceedings in any manner whatsoever and they will take it to its logical conclusion without causing unnecessary impediment, in its free flow to its logical conclusion.
b) That in full and final settlement of all the financial claims of O.P. No.3 that may accrue against the Applicant No.2 or his family members, as on date, is agreed that the Applicant No.2 is ready to pay a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- afresh in the name of O. P. No.3 on the day of second motion of the Petition No.364/2024 filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act pending in the Family Court, Firozabad. Parties agree that in case on 08.11.2024, the entire amount of Rs.6,00,000/- is not ready with the Applicant No.2 for payment to O.P. No.3, he shall deposit a draft at least Rs.3,00,000/- purchased from a Nationalized Bank on 08.11.2024 in the file of the Court proceedings of Case No.364/2024 pending in the Court of Family Court, Firozabad and
seek another date for bringing draft of Rs.3,00,000/- by making appropriate prayer before the Hon'ble Court, where the Petition No.364/2024 filed under section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act is pending in the Family court, Firozabad.
(c) That after receiving this amount of Rs.6,00,000/-, the O.P. No.3 shall not be entitled to claim any further maintenance/financial assistance of any nature whatsoever from the Applicant No.2 or his family members in future under any law or any circumstances. The parties agree that at the time of filing of the Petitioner u/s 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Applicant No.2 has given a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- by means of the Bank draft dated 10.04.2024 numbered as 84 of HDFC Bank NOIDA which had already been encashed, this draft was given by Applicant No.2 to the O.P. No.3 in case No.364/2024 pending in the Family Court, Firozabad, that amount is set to have been adjusted in the expenses and maintenance amount and the Applicant No.2 shall not call for any further adjustment of the same in future in any manner whatsoever, but he agrees to hold his responsibility to pay a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- as agreed today in two equal installments of Rs.3,00,000/- each as mentioned above.
(d) That parties agree that after the entire amount of alimony of Rs.6,00,000/- as agreed today is paid by the Applicant No.2 to O. P. No.3 and the decree of divorce by mutual consent is passed by the Family Court, Firozabad, all the litigations initiated against each other or their family members by either side shall be withdrawn or set aside or quash in terms of the present settlement.
(e) That it has been agreed between the parties that the custody of the minor son, Rudra shall remain with the Applicant No.2 for the welfare and interest of the minor. The Applicant No.2 is residing at present in Delhi along with Applicant No.1 and his sister in connection with his job and he has stated that his minor son is living with him in Delhi and he has already admitted in nursery class in Srijan School, Delhi. The O.P. No.3 shall have visitation right to visit her minor son at least once in a month on second saturday and sunday of every month at Delhi, where the minor is living with his father. O. P. No.3 shall go there after due intimation to the Applicants. Parties also agree that one of the festivals (Holi or Diwali), the O. P. NO.3 may take the minor for celebration of festival with her and bring him back to the house of Applicant No.2 two days after the festival is over or as agreed by the parties.
(f) That it has been agreed between the parties that all civil and criminal cases, if any, filed by them against each other regarding present matrimonial dispute shall be withdrawn by the parties concerned by taking appropriate steps before the Court/authority concerned as soon as possible.
(g) That the parties will not file any fresh case against each other in respect of this matrimonial dispute. They have no claim against each other in future also.
(h) That it has been agreed between the parties that they shall not violate the terms and conditions of this settlement otherwise the aggrieved party will be free to take legal recourse."
i. The applicants shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
ii. The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
iii. That the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
iv. The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicants.
v. In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law.
vi. The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 13.11.2024
Nitin Verma
Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to anticipatory bail given the successful mediation and settlement of the matrimonial dispute between them.
Whether the grant of anticipatory bail will prejudice the trial of the case involving Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC, and Section 4 of DP Act, 1986.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)Referred¶20
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC online SC 98 · Who else cites this
Smt Sarita Alias Dhanwanti And Another
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
