The main legal point established in the judgment is the exercise of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings based on amicable settlements and to prevent the abuse of process of law.

P.S. TEJI, J.

1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sh. Amit Kumar Chauhaan, Sh. Suresh Kumar Chauhaan, Smt. Laxmi Chauhaan, Sh. Rahul Kumar Chauhaan, Ms. Reena Chauhaan, Sh. Mukul Khanna @ Dev, Smt. Ritu Khanna @ Sonu, Smt. Neetu Arora and Smt. Kanta Naagpal @ Kavita for quashing of FIR No. 142/2010 dated 06.06.2010, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Gandhi Nagar on the basis of the mediation report of the Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkadooma Courts, Delhi in view of the settlement arrived at between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, Smt. Soniya @ Sonu on 26.08.2013.

2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2, present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant in the FIR in question by SI P.S. Rawat.

3. The factual matrix of the present case is that the marriage between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 was solemnized on 31.01.2009. When the complainant came to her matrimonial home from the phera ceremony, the complainant was beaten up mercilessly by her sisters-in-law (Reenu and Rita) upon instigation by the complainant’s mother-in-law and husband. The complainant was constantly tortured and harassed by her in-laws and her husband in demands of a new motorcycle and a gold ring for the Bua of the husband of the complainant. On 16.05.2009, the complainant was compelled to leave her matrimonial home.

Thereafter, respondent no.2/complainant lodged a complaint which resulted into the registration of the FIR in question against the petitioners. Subsequently, the parties arrived at an amicable settlement Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkadooma Courts, Delhi.

4. Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. As per the mediation report, it is agreed that the parties shall take divorce by way of mutual consent. It is agreed that the petitioner no.1 shall pay an amount of Rs. 1.5 Lakhs to respondent no.2 in full and final settlement of all her claims including maintenance (present, past and future), permanent alimony, stridhan etc. It is also agreed that the schedule of payment shall be as enunciated in the terms of mediation report. It is also agreed that the parties shall get quashed the FIR in question before this Court after obtaining the decree of divorce and it is further agreed that the respondent no.2 will cooperate at the time of quashing of the FIR in question. It is also agreed that the case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. shall be withdrawn by respondent no.2 on or before 07.09.2013. It is also agreed that all expenses for the quashing petition and the two motions of divorce shall be borne by petitioner no.1. It has been further agreed that after this settlement the parties shall not be left with any claims against each other. It is also agreed that apart from the ones already mentioned, no other cases are pending between the parties and that if any such case/complaint is found pending between them, the same shall be withdrawn by the concerned party in terms of this settlement. Respondent No.2 affirmed the contents of the aforesaid settlement and of her affidavit dated 08.10.2015 supporting this petition. In the affidavit, the respondent no.2 has stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. All the disputes and differences have been resolved through mutual consent. Now no dispute with petitioners survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end. Statement of respondent no.2 has been recorded in this regard in which she stated that she has entered into a compromise with the petitioners and has settled all the disputes with them. She further stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

5. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 Apex Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes