RAVINDER KAUR versus ANIL KUMAR

Citation: [2015] 4 S.C.R. 551 · Decided: 09-04-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.S. KHEHAR · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 4 S.C.R. 551 
RAVINDER KAUR 
v. 
ANIL KUMAR 
(Criminal Appeal No. 457 of 2008) 
APRIL 09, 2015 
[JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR AND S.A. BOBDE, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 493 and 494 - Complaint by C 
wife against her husband ulss. 493, 494, 495, 496, 420, 
506 rlw. s/ 1208 /PC - Alleging that the husband deceitfully 
co-habited with her even after obtaining ex-parte decree of 
divorce against her - Complaint not entertained by courts 0 
below -
Appeal limited to the a/legation ulss. 493 and 494 
alone - Held: In view of the fact that the ex-parte decree 
was subsequently set aside, the matt:imonial ties would be 
deemed to subsist during the alleged period - Hence, the 
charge uls. 493 not made out and The offence u/s. 494 is 
E 
compounded in terms of s. 320 Cr.PC - The husband is 
directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5 /akhs as compensation to 
the wife - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s. 320. 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -
s. 300 F 
Explanation -
Complaint u/s. 376 /PC -
Accused 
discharged and the order attained finality - Subsequent 
complaint ulss. 493, 494, 495, 496, 506 rlw. s. 1208 /PC 
on the same set of facts - Maintainability of - Held: In view 
of Explanation to s. 300, second proceedings would not be G 
barred because no trial was conducted in previous 
proceedings and discharge of the accused therein cannot 
be construed as acquittal. 
551 
H 
552 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 4 S.C.R. 
A 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. It cannot be said that Section 300 Cr.P.C. 
will be an embargo to obstruct the right of the 
appellant to file a second complaint against the 
B respondent. The respondent had not been tried, 
in furtherance of the previous complaint made by the 
appellant, u/s. 376 of IPC. The respondent had been 
discharged in furtherance of the complaint made by 
the appellant, without any trial. The explanation u/s. 
c 300 Cr.P.C. clearly mandates that the dismissal of 
a complaint, or the discharge of an accused, would 
not be construed as an acquittal, for the purposes 
of this Section. Therefore, the proceedings in the 
second complaint would not be barred, because no 
D trial had been conducted against the respondent, in 
furtherance of the first complaint. Thus, it is open 
to the appellant, to press the accusations levelled by 
her, through her second complaint. [Para 8] [558-E-H; 
E 
559-A-C] 
2. To satisfy the ingredients of s. 493 IPC the man 
concerned should have deceived the woman, to 
believe the existence of matrimonial ties with her. And 
based on the aforesaid belief, the man should have 
F cohabited with her. In the present case, consequent 
upon the passing of the order dated 19.02.1996 
(whereby the ex-parte decree dated 08.01.1994 was 
set aside), the matrimonial ties between the appellant 
and the respondent, will be deemed to have subsisted 
G during the entire period under reference (08.01.1994 
to 23.06.1994). In fact, the accusation of the appellant, 
on the aforesaid premise, in the first complaint filed 
by the appellant against the respondent (under 
Section 376 IPC) was not entertained, and the 
H respondent was discharged, just because of the 
RAVINDER KAUR v. ANIL KUMAR 
553 
above inference. Therefore, the charge against the A 
respondent is not made out, u/s. 493 IPC, because the 
respondent could not have deceived the appellant of 
the existence of a "lawful marriage", when a lawful 
marriage indeed existed between the parties, during 
the period under reference. [Para 9] [559-G-H; 560-A,F-
B 
H; 561-A-B] 
3. Section 494 IPC is compoundable. In view of 
the facts and circumstances of this case, specially the 
factual position as has emerged after the ex-parte C 
decree of divorce was set aside, the best course 
for the parties is to settle their dispute amicably. 
Section 320 Cr.P.C. is an avenue available to the 
parties, for such resolution. In view of the consent 
expressed by the appellant to this Court that she D 
would have no objection to the compounding of the 
offence under Section 494 IPC, the compounding of 
complaint made by the appellant with reference to s. 
494 IPC is directed. The respondent is further directed 
to pay a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs, as compensation to the E 
appellant. [Paras 10 and 12] [561-B,H; 562-A-C] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal 
Appeal No. 457 of 2008. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.01.2007 of the 
High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal 
Misc. No. 50496-M of 2003. 
F 
Ajay K
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.