Back
2016 Supreme(Del) 4580
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.
Anand Kumar Verma & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State (Nct. of Delhi) and Anr. - Respondent
W.P. (Crl) 110 of 2016
Decided On : 13-01-2016
For the Respondents:Sanjay Lao, Addl. Standing Counsel (Crl.) and SI Ranvir Singh, P.S. Najafgarh, Advocates.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes, the dissolution of marriage by mutual consent, and the lawful resolution of financial matters.
Headnote:
MUTUAL CONSENT - Matrimonial Dispute - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 482 - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13(1)(ia)(d), Section 13(B)(1), Section 13(B)(2) - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 125 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 406, Section 498A, Section 34 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 205
Fact of the Case:
The husband and wife, after facing temperamental and ideological differences, lived separately. Multiple legal proceedings were initiated against each other, including FIRs, complaint cases, divorce, and maintenance cases. A Compromise Deed was reached between the parties, leading to the dissolution of marriage by mutual consent and settlement of financial matters.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties had amicably settled their marital disputes through a Compromise Deed, obtained a decree of divorce by mutual consent, and settled financial matters. The court observed that no useful purpose would be served by proceeding with the subject FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom.
Issues: The issues involved the settlement of matrimonial disputes, dissolution of marriage by mutual consent, and the quashing of the subject FIR and related proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lawful settlement between the parties, the obtaining of a decree of divorce by mutual consent, and the amicable resolution of financial matters. The court emphasized that no useful purpose would be served by continuing with the subject FIR and related proceedings.
Final Decision: The FIR No. 372/2012 under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC and the proceedings arising therefrom were set aside and quashed, subject to each petitioner depositing a sum of RS. 5,000/- with the Victims' Compensation Fund.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.
1. The present is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of FIR No. 372/2012 under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC registered at Police Station-Najafgarh, Delhi and the proceedings arising there from.
2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner no. 1 (husband) and respondent No.2/complainant (wife) were married to each other according to Hindu rites and customs on 29th March, 2011. Owing to temperamental and ideological differences between the parties to the marriage, they started living separately since 11th April, 2011. No child has been born out of the said wedlock. On a complaint instituted by respondent no.2 (wife), the subject FIR was registered against the petitioner no. 1 (husband) and his family members.
3. Apart from the subject FIR, the following proceedings were instituted by the parties against each other:-
"i. FIR No. 372/2012, registered at P.S. Najafgarh, under Section 498A/406/34 IPC registered on the complaining statement of the first party pending in the court of Ms. Manu Goel Kharb, Ld. MM, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi and the same is fixed for 21.05.2015. That during the bail proceedings the second party had paid a sum of RS. 5 lacs to the first party.
ii. FIR No. 1027/2014, registered at P.S. Saraswati Vihar/Subhash Place, under section 377/509/34 IPC registered on the complaining statement of the first party pending in investigation.
iii. Complaint Case u/s 200 Cr.PC. for offences under section 323/506/34 IPC filed by the second Party against the First Party and her family members, in which the first party and her mother and father have been summoned and now the same is pending before the Hon'ble Court of Ms. Ruchika Singhla, Ld. MM, Dwarka Court, New Delhi.
iv. FIR No. 33/2014, registered at P.S. Saraswati Vihar/Subhash Place, under section 354/509/506 IPC registered on the complaining statement of the sister of the second party pending in the Hon'ble Court of Ms. Shefali Barnala Tandon, Ld. MM, Rohini Courts, Delhi; and now the same is fixed for 24.08.2015.
v. Divorce case u/s 13(1)(ia)(d) of HMA fixed by the second party against the first party and the same is pending before the Hon'ble Court of Ms. Bimla Kumari, Ld. Judge, Family Court, Rohini Courts, Delhi; and the same is fixed for 20/07/2015.
vi. Maintenance case u/s 125 Cr.P.C filed by the first party against the second party and the same is pending before the Hon'ble Court of Ms. Bimla Kumari, Ld. Judge, Family Court, Rohini Courts, Delhi; and the same is fixed for 20/07/2015."
4. Counsel for the parties state that with the intervention of elders in the family and friends, the parties to the union have arrived at an amicable resolution of their outstanding marital disputes which has culminated into a Compromise Deed dated 19th May, 2015. The salient terms and conditions of the afore-stated settlement are as follows:-
"1. That it is agreed between the parties that the marriage should be dissolved by way of mutual consent by filing the divorce petition on or before 30.05.2015 and the second motion shall be filed within 15 days after the expiry of statutory period of 6 months.
2. That it is agreed between both the parties that the first party shall co-operate in quashing of FIR No. 1027/2014 and FIR No. 372/2012, after the date of order of the first motion petition and the second party will also cooperate in getting FIR No. 33/2014 quashed before the Hon'ble High Court.
3. That the second party had already paid an amount of RS. 4.25 lacs in cash to the first party and the second party will not object the bail application of the second party in FIR No. 1027/2014, registered u/S 377/509/34 IPC, P.S. Saraswati Vihar.
4. That the second party will pay a sum of RS. 4.25 lacs to the first party at the time of recording of the statement at the first motion u/s 13(B)(1) HMA which is to be filed by the second party on or before 30th May, 2015.
5. That th
