IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.42931 of 2007 1. Kamal Kumar Prasad, Son of Mr. Krishan Chand Prasad. 2. Krishna Chand Prasad, Son of Late Mathura Prasad. 3. Smt. Jyoti Prasad, Wife of Krishnachand Prasad. All resident of Mohalla Manik Tola, PS Manik Tola in the district of Kolkata in the State of West Bengal. ------ Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Suman Prasad, Wife of Sri Kamal Kumar Prasad, and Daughter of Banke Bihari Prasad, Resident of Mohalla Nadaraganj, P.O. + P.S. Civil Lines Gaya in the district of Gaya. ---- Opposite Parties. ---------- For the petitioners : Mr. Shiw Kumar Prabhakar, Advocate. For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate 12 16.12.2011 This application has been filed against the order dated 26th of April, 2005 by which cognizance was taken under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act arising out of Complaint Case No. 343 of 2005, Tr. No. 1280 of 2005. During the hearing of this case, which was first taken up on 12.1.2009 notices were issued to the opposite party no. 2 i.e. the wife of the petitioner no. 1. On 2.12.2010 both the parties i.e. the petitioner along with his mother and the opposite party no. 2 along with her guardian were required to be present in Chambers. The case was listed in Chambers on different dates i.e. 30.3.2011 and 27.4.2011. On 28.6.2011 this Court noted that the petitioner no. 1 had not appeared in Chambers as he was posted as an Officer in a 2 private company known as G.I. Shipping at Port Blair. The mother, brother and other guardian of petitioner no. 1 appeared in this Court. It became apparent on talking with the guardians of both the petitioner and opposite party no. 2 that there could no positive solution which would result in both the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 resuming them their marital life. Finally after much discussion and on appearance of petitioner no. 1, the parties agreed that they would file an application under Section 13 (B) of the Hindu Marriage Act provided the petitioner no. 1 to pay a certain sum of money and return all the items belonging to the opposite party no. 2. The petitioners agreed to do so. Petitioner no. 1 has in terms of the agreement reached by the parties, handed over a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- by way of two drafts, one on 17.10.2011 and the other on 14.12.2011. The petitioner no. 1 has also returned all the house hold items given to her at the time of her marriage and has duly signed upon the list of articles. This list was form part of the records of this case. The parties have also signed the 3 divorce petition under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Now, that the matter has been settled between the parties, they have agreed that they did not wish to live with each other and the petitioner no. 1 has paid a sum of money by way of one time settlement, nothing more is left in the criminal case. This Court accordingly, quashes the order of cognizance and allows this application. It is further directed that the petitioner no. 1 should file the divorce petition which has duly been signed by the opposite party no. 2 in the Court of the Family Court, Gaya within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Gaya after fixing a date for appearance of the parties will grant a decree of divorce under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act incorporating the fact that the petitioner no. 1 i.e. the husband Kamal Kumar Prasad has returned all the items that were gifted by the parents of Suman Prasad at the time of marriage. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Gaya shall also record that a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- has 4 been paid to the opposite party no. 2 by demand drafts which have been handed over to Suman Prasad in presence of her father, the counsel and the Court. This application is thus, allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)