C482/584/2020
2023 Latest Caselaw 3405 UK

                   Office Notes, reports,
                   orders or proceedings
SL.
          Date       or directions and                        COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
                   Registrar's order with
                         Signatures

      08.11.2023
                                            C482 No. 584 of 2020
                                            With
                                            MCRC/2/2023 for recall application
                                            Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Mohd. Umar, Advocate, for the applicants.

Mr. S.C. Dumka, AGA, for the State.

Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, Advocate, for the respondent.

On the basis of the consensus, which was extended by the parties, this C482 Application was considered on merits and on the parameters as it was settled in the conciliation proceedings, the C482 Application was decided on 13.03.2023, whereby it was settled that applicant No. 2, had agreed and would also follow, that on 26.04.2023, he will be going to the in-laws family and would gracefully take respondent No.2, the complainant with him to the matrimonial home which he has chosen it to keep the respondent complainant and would affectionately discharge his matrimonial obligations.

Learned counsel for the applicant has filed a Recall Application, contending thereof that the conditions given in the order dated 13.03.2023 has not been complied with by the respondent and she has not joined the matrimonial home to discharge the matrimonial obligations.

In fact, when these proceedings have been taken up earlier on couple of occasions, there apparently seem to be very bleak possibility of settlement, but still the efforts were made for mediation, but that ultimately seems to have failed in the light of the pleadings made in the Recall Application.

The respondent No. 2 who is represented by Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, Advocate, submits that there are certain allegations which have been levelled in the Recall Applications pertaining to compliance of the directions made in the judgment dated 13.03.2023, hence, he seeks to file the objection.

But, this Court is of the opinion, that looking to the conditions as prevailing, qua the interse relationship between the applicant and the respondent, there would be no possibility for settlement rather the appropriate recourse would be to recall the order dated 13.03.2023 and allow the Recall Application, as filed by the applicant and relegate the applicants to face the trial of the Criminal Case in the light of the parameters prescribed by the judgment of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, as reported in 2022 (10) SCC 51, as all the offences for which the applicants have been tried, they pertain to the offence under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 of IPC, as well as Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, they all carry a sentence of less than 7 years, the applicants are directed to surrender before the competent Court i.e. the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 5th, Dehradun, and seek their bail in the light of the judgment of Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

However, it is made clear that whatsoever observations have been made in the order or in the Recall Application, will not be creating any obstacles as such in an independent consideration of the bail application to be filed by the applicants, in compliance of today's order.

Subject to the aforesaid, the C482 Application stands disposed of on merits.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 08.11.2023 Mahinder/