The central legal point established is the High Court's inherent power under Section 482 to quash criminal proceedings based on settlement agreements, especially in matrimonial cases with predominantly civil character.

SURESH KAIT, J.

1. By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 443/2014 registered at Police Station Shakarpur, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submit that the aforesaid case was registered on the complaint of respondent No.2, namely, Ms. Payal Jain, consequent upon certain matrimonial and domestic disputes having arisen between the parties pursuant to her marriage dated 08.12.2012 with the petitioner No.1, Rohit Kumar Jain. Meanwhile, the respondent No.2 and the petitioners have amicably settled their disputes vide Compromise-cum-Settlement Deed dated 02.05.2014 arrived at before the Mediation & Conciliation Centre, Karkardooma Court Delhi. Consequent to the said settlement, marriage between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has been dissolved vide decree of mutual divorce dated 27.05.2015 under Section 13 B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Copies of the aforenoted settlement and divorce decree have been annexed to the present petition as Annexure P-2 and P-3. Moreover, the respondent No.2 has received the agreed amount, thus, she does not wish to pursue her case further against the petitioners.

3. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court and has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer SI Manish Kumar, CAW Cell/East Delhi. The respondent No.2 submits that she has amicably settled all the disputes with the petitioners as per settlement dated 02.05.2014, marriage between her and the petitioner No.1 has been dissolved vide decree of divorce dated 27.05.2015. She has received the agreed amount. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of aforesaid settlement and of her affidavit dated 04.08.2015 supporting this petition and submits that now no dispute with petitioners survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end.

4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State submits that case is at the initial stage of investigation as charge-sheet is yet to be filed. The present matter is a matrimonial one and since the respondent No.2/complainant does not wish to pursue the case against petitioners, no purpose would be served if the petitioners are directed to face trial. Therefore, the State has no objection, if this Court allows the present petition.

5. Under the circumstances and looking to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein the Apex Court has referred to a number of matters for the proposition that even a non-compoundable offence can also be quashed on the ground of a settlement agreement between the offender and the victim, if the circumstances so warrant; by observing as under:

“58. ....However, certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or the family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable, the High Court may within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated.”

6. While recognizing the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, the aforesaid dictum has been affirmed by the Apex Court in a recent judgment in Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2014 6 SCC 466. The pertine