SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Dowry harsement case settlement by ips officer varun kumar . 11 லட்சம் supreme court full order

by · Published · Updated

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).   10­12   OF 2023

(Arising out of S.L.P.(CRL.) NO(S)5746­48 OF 2018)

  1. PRIYADARSHNI     … APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

STATE REPRESENTED BY

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

AND ANR. ETC.                                                                   …RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Leave granted.

  • These appeals are directed against the judgment and final Order dated 26.06.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Original Petition No(s).14573 of 2017, 17112 of 2015 and 24197 of 2015 whereby the High Court has quashed the entire criminal proceedings pending against the private respondents herein, who are accused No(s).1 to 3 before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet Court, Chennai, in Case No.CC/0002036/2015.
  • Learned counsel for the parties submit that the matter has been settled between the appellant and the private respondents.

The terms of the Settlement are as under:

“The Litigation between the parties have been fought from the year 2011 onwards. Now at this stage, respondents no. 2 to 4 approached the Petitioner’s

Senior Counsel Mr. Vikas Singh to effect a compromise. Mr. Vikas Singh, Senior Advocate, for the petitioner and being the Leader of the Bar agreed to act as an intervener between the parties and has persuaded the petitioner to agree for a compromise in the larger interest of the parties. Hence with a view to put a quietus to litigation and in order to purchase peace, the parties have reached a compromise in the following terms­

  1. The Impugned judgment dated 26.06.2018 passed in Crl. O.P. No.14573 of 2017, Crl. O.P.No(s). 17112 and 24197 of 2015, all findings and observations of the High Court recorded therein is set aside.
  2. It is further agreed that in view of the compromise between the parties, the case in CC No 2036 of 2015 on the file of Ld. XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidepet, Chennai u/s 417, 204, 506 (i) r/w 34 of IPC, Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998, Section 66 of IT Act, 2000 against the private respondents herein R­2 to R­4 (Accused no. 1 to 3) and entire proceedings arising there from is quashed by this Hon’ble Court.
  3. Having regard to the fact of loss of time and reputation of the petitioner and on account of the events leading to this Litigation, as suggested by Mr. Vikas Singh (Senior Advocate), the private respondents have agreed to pay a sum of Rupees Eleven lakhs (Rs 11,00,000/­) as compensation to the petitioner.

However, the petitioner is not desirous of appropriating the compensation amount agreed to be paid under this compromise, personally. Instead, the petitioner is volunteering to donate this amount of compensation of Rs 11,00,000/­ to the “Supreme Court Advocates Welfare Fund” for the utilisation of welfare of needy lawyers which shall be paid by the private respondents by way of Demand Draft directly to the SCBA (Supreme Court Bar Association) within 10 days of passing of the order. Mr. Vikas Singh being the President of Supreme Court Bar Association agrees to accept the compensation amount for the utilisation of the need of the Bar.

  1. The parties agree that by this compromise, all the disputes between them shall remain settled and so neither parties shall initiate any proceedings either civil and criminal or police action in respect of the facts or events leading to the dispute between the parties.

The parties agree not to interfere with each other nor level any allegations or threats in future against each other or their families nor will respondents No. 2 to 4 interfere with or act against the witnesses of the CC No. 2036 of 2015.

The parties agree that above settlement between the parties shall be final and there shall be no more issues between them.”

  • Having heard learned senior counsel for the parties, we are of the view that it is just and appropriate to dispose of these appeals in terms of the settlement entered into between the appellant and the private respondents herein. Ordered accordingly.
  • In view of above, the impugned order of the High Court stands modified in the aforesaid terms.
  • Pending application, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

        ……………………………J.     (S. ABDUL NAZEER)

……………………………J.

New Delhi;                                 (HIMA KOHLI)

December 14, 2022.

ITEM NO.45               COURT NO.3               SECTION II-C

               S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

 Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)  No(s).  5746-

5748/2018

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated  26-06-2018 in CRLOP No. 14573/2017 26-06-2018 in CRLOP No. 17112/2015 26-062018 in CRLOP No. 24197/2015 passed by the High Court Of Judicature

At Madras) G.PRIYADHARSHNI                                    Petitioner(s)

                                VERSUS

THE STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ANR.

ETC. Respondent(s)

 IA No. 139729/2018 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.

 IA No. 96481/2018 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.

 IA No. 139727/2018 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL

DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES

 IA No. 96480/2018 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL

DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

 Date : 14-12-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

         HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER

         HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas singh, Sr. Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv.

Mr. Kaustubh Shukla, Adv.

                    Mr. Konark Tyagi, AOR

                  

For Respondent(s) Mr. V. Krishnamurthy, Sr. Adv./AAG

                    Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Ms. Nupur Sharma, Adv.

Mr. Shobhit Dwivedi, Adv.

Ms. Richa Vishwakarma, Adv.

Ms. Vaidehi Rastogi, Adv.

Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Manu Yadav, Adv.

                    Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Ms. Sharma Usmani, Adv.

Mr. Shubhangni Jain, Adv.

Mr. Sheezan Hashmi, Adv.

Mr. Abhishek Saket, Adv.

Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, Adv.                    

          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

                             O R D E R Leave granted.

The appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed order.

Pending applications, if any,  stand disposed of.

(NEELAM GULATI)                                 (KAMLESH RAWAT)

ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                         COURT MASTER (NSH)

(Signed order is placed on the file)

You may also like...