The main legal point established is the need for trial and scrutiny of evidence to establish the offences committed by the applicants, which influenced the court's decision to reject the compounding application and related C482 applications.

JUDGMENT :

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Normally, the 482 CrPC jurisdiction so far it relates to the compounding of the offences, which are private in nature, and emanating from the matrimonial dispute, the Court takes a liberal view, but this would be a case where a liberal aptitude of the Court is not required to be ventured to be adopted and applied in the instant case.

2. As per the case of the applicants as submitted in the 482 application, in C482 Application No.1165 of 2021, it is not in dispute that the complainant/respondent has registered FIR No.429 of 2020, dated 20.06.2020, for alleged involvement of the present applicants for commission of the offence under sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 of IPC and under sections 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights over Marriage) Act, 2019. Apparently, the controversy since being private in nature, it seems to be compoundable on the joint request to be made by the parties by filing an appropriate application under section 320 of CrPC.

3. Initially after the grant of the interim order dated 03.09.2021, the notices were issued to respondent no.2, and respondent no.2, has filed a counter affidavit, and had contested the proceedings by placing on record, the documents in relation to the atrocities exercised by the applicants against the respondent, and in support thereto, she has also placed on record the photographs of the injuries suffered by her and the medical report too. The contents of the said counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.2, has not been objected by the applicants, and rather on the contrary, the compounding application has been preferred under the joint signatures of the parties contending thereof that they have entered into a settlement.

4. In a matrimonial dispute, in case, if at all, there is a settlement, its terms has had to be in writing, giving thereof the terms and conditions of the settlement of the dispute, and the reasons behind it. The affidavits filed respectively by both the parties in the instant case are as vague as the pleadings in 482 application are, and there is no specific reasons given though number of the grounds has been attempted to be assigned to the compounding application by the learned counsel for the applicants, which are outside the records.

5. Even the respondent no.2/the complainant, who is present before this Court, this Court had interacted with her in the presence of the applicant no.1, ex-husband of the present respondent no.2, and she has submitted before the Court that she was constrained to enter into a settlement because of the development, which has taken place thereafter, that after giving Triple Talaq to the complainant, in violation to the Act of 2019, the applicant no.1, has already married for the second time, and out of the second marriage, he has got children. In the absence of there being any reasons given or much less a valid reason, merely because of the fact that, which has been argued though outside the records of the pleadings, that the solemnization of the second marriage by applicant No.1, was with her consent is a fact, which is not revealed from the pleadings nor even in the terms of the compounding application, nor the statement recorded by respondent No.2 before this Court.

6. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties as well as the private parties to the dispute, who are present before this Court and having scrutinized, the allegations leveled in the FIR No.429, dated 20.06.2020, it was absolutely an atrocious act, on part of the applicants to have brutally assaulted respondent no.2, which is a fact not denied by them. The conditions of the settlement, which has been sought to be referred to in terms of the compounding application has been attempted by the learned counsel for the applicants to be justified by virtue of the so called report submitted by the SSP, Saharanpur, on 06.11.2020, wherein, the SSP, Saharanpur, while making submitting his report to Commissioner, Saharanpur Mandal, has r