J.B.GARG, J. - (1.) KAVITA Sharma and her brother Arun Kumar, have moved this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and challenged the summoning order and the complaint under Section 420 read with Section 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code, instituted by Megh Raj, the husband of Kavita Sharma.
(2.) MEGH Raj, the husband, has filed a complaint under Section 420 read with Section 120 -B of the Indian.Penal Code against his wife Kavita Sharma and her brother Arun Kumar alleging that on 29.4.90, a compromise was arrived at between the parties and a Bank Draft of Rs. 35,000/ - was handed over to Kavita Sharma and a joint petition of divorce was to be moved by both the spouses and a compromise was also executed in writing on 2.5.1990 in this regard as a consequence of which the wife withdrew her petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the husband withdrew the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and also a criminal revision in respect of an offence under Section 500/120 -B of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.) IN this complaint the main allegation of Megh Raj the husband, is that though a Bank Draft of Rs. 35,000/ - dated 30.4.1990, has been received by the wife but still she has not fulfilled the remaining part of her agreement in as much as she has not come forward with a joint petition for divorce. An agreement deed dated 2.5.1990 is Annexure R:1. A perusal of its clause (E) shows that this Bank Draft of Rs. 35,000/ - was delivered in lieu of claims relating to articles of dowry and maintenance against the husband or other members of his family. The question for decision here is whether a wife, who has received a sum of Rs. 35,000/ - by means of a Bank Draft in respect of articles of . dowry and maintenance, is bound to come forward and move a joint petition for divorce and also whether her denial to do so would come in the ambit of Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code?;