The main legal point established in the judgment is the emphasis on amicable resolution of disputes in matrimonial cases and the sparing exercise of power under Section 482 of the Code to quash criminal proceedings in cases with predominantly civil character.

SURESH KAIT, J.

Crl. M.A. 17462/2015 (for exemption)

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Accordingly, the application is allowed.

CRL.M.C. 4880/2015

1. Vide the present petition, petitioners seek directions thereby quashing of FIR No.272/2011 registered at Police Station Malviya Nagar, Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against them.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the aforesaid case was registered on the complaint of respondent No.2, namely, Ms. Manita due to some matrimonial disputes. Thereafter, respondent no. 2 settled all disputes with the petitioners before Special Judge, Saket Court, New Delhi on 01.09.2014. Consequent thereto, marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 has been dissolved vide a decree of divorce dated 31.07.2015. As per the settlement, the petitioners agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- as full and final settlement. Out of which Rs.2,00,000/- each has been paid at the time of recording of first and second motion respectively and remaining amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- has been paid today in the Court by way of DD no.006288 dated 04.11.2015 drawn on HDFC Bank in the name of respondent no.2. Thus, she does not want to pursue the case further against the petitioners.

3. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court with her father namely Mahender Singh. She has been duly identified by SI Prem Singh, Investigating Officer of the case. Respondent no. 2 submits that the aforesaid case was registered due to some misunderstanding. Now she has settled all her disputes with the petitioners. Consequent thereto her marriage with petitioner no. 1 has been dissolved and she has received entire agreed amount of Rs.6,00,000/-. She has no complaint whatsoever against the petitioners and if the present petition is allowed, she has no objection.

4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State submits that after investigation, police has filed the chargesheet, charges have been framed and the case is pending for prosecution evidence. She further submits that present case pertains to matrimonial disputes and since, the petitioners and respondent no.2 have settled their disputes and marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 has been dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 31.07.2015, no purpose would be served if the petitioners are directed to face trial. Therefore, the State has no objection, if the present petition is allowed.

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