Smt. Radhika Beena Lakra v. Shri Kulchand Kispotta And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

CRR/4/2023 Smt. Radhika Beena Lakra ... Petitioner Vs.

Shri Kulchand Kispotta and another ... Respondents Mr. Ananda Halder ... for the Petitioner Mr. P.K. Bala ...for the Respondent No.1 Ms. A.S. Zinu ...for the Respondent No.2 August 25, 2023 [M.A. Mobin] Item No.5 The learned Advocates for the petitioner and the respondents are present.

The instant revisional application has been filed being aggrieved by the Order No.7 dated 30.12.2022 passed by the learned Judge (Family Court) at Port Blair in Misc. Case No.77 of 2021 disposing the case in terms of compromise in absence of the opposite party.

The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that a hand written petition was filed by the petitioner signed by her. However, the said petition was not signed by the respondent/husband but by the learned Advocate representing the respondent had been placed before the Trial Court. The learned Trial Court passed the impugned order considering the aforesaid petition to be a joint compromise petition and had passed an order allowing the application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code in terms of the compromise between the parties. The learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that a formal compromise petition was

never filed before the Trial Court with the consent and concurrence of both the parties and the said order was liable to be set aside. The learned Advocate for the respondent/husband submitted that he was instructed by the respondent/husband on phone to sign the alleged compromise petition marked as Annexure P-5 to the instant revisional application. The respondent/husband in compliance with the impugned order has been paying a sum of Rs.35,000/- per month. A compromise petition should categorically state the terms of settlement between the parties on affidavit duly signed by each one of them. The compromise petition taken into consideration by the learned Trial Court suffers from illegalities with regard to the signature of both the parties on affidavit and specific terms mentioned therein and therefore it cannot be legally sanctified to be a joint compromise petition. Accordingly, the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. allowed in terms of the compromise between the parties as mentioned in the impugned order dated 30.12.2022 is set aside.

The learned Trial Court is to consider the application filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in Misc. Case No.77 of 2021 afresh. In case the parties resolve to settle their issues through a compromise a joint compromise petition should be filed complying the legal formalities.

The instant revisional application is accordingly disposed of. Copy of this order be communicated to the learned Trial Court for information and compliance.

(Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.)