Back
2022 Supreme(Del) 1154
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.
Raja Berwa & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State & Anr. - Respondents
Crl.M.C. 2383 of 2014
Decided On : 12-04-2022
Mr. Saurabh Kumar Tuteja, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, APP, SI Hawa Singh, P.S. Mangol Puri, Mr. Bharat Singh, Advocate, for the Respondent.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of matrimonial disputes, if the parties have settled the disputes amicably and without any pressure, FIRs or complaints can be quashed to meet the ends of justice.
Headnote:
Compromise - Quashing of FIR - Cr.P.C., IPC - 498A/406/34
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking to quash an FIR registered for offences under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) based on a settlement between the parties. The parties had entered into a compromise and settled all disputes amicably.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complainant had entered into the compromise willingly and without any pressure. It also noted that the settlement had been reached after the parties had moved for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) and that the complainant had received the entire settled amount.
Issues: The main issue was whether the FIR should be quashed based on the settlement between the parties and the legal provisions governing the quashing of FIRs in cases of matrimonial disputes.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, B.S. Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Ors, and Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. vs. Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr. to allow the quashing of the FIR based on the settlement between the parties.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom based on the settlement reached between the parties.
ORDER
1. The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter 'Cr.P.C.') has been filed by the petitioners praying for quashing of FIR bearing No. 702/2006 registered at Police Station Mangol Puri, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter 'IPC') and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. Petitioner no. 1 is present before this Court and has been identified by their counsel Mr. Saurabh Kumar Tuteja and Investigating Officer SI Hawa Singh, Police Station Mangol Puri. Respondent No.2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and the Investigating Officer.
3. On the query made by this Court, respondent no. 2 has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise on her own free will and without any pressure. It is also stated by respondent no.2 that the entire dispute has been amicably settled between the parties.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 got married to each other on 20th April, 2003 at Mangol Puri according to Hindu rites and ceremonies but due to some temperamental differences between them, they started living separately since May, 2005. There is one girl child born out of their wedlock, who is now major.
5. Despite several efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle the differences. Respondent no. 2 lodged a complaint in C.A.W. Cell which culminated into the aforesaid FIR against all the petitioners on 27th September, 2006.
6. With the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties entered into settlement before Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts.
7. Further, in pursuance of the said settlement, the parties moved for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter 'HMA'). Petitioner No.1 and respondent no.2 filed their first motion of the divorce petition under Section 13B(1) of HMA which was allowed on 31st August, 2021 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, North-West, Rohini, New Delhi. Petition under Section 13B(2) of HMA was filed by the parties and the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 stood dissolved by mutual consent vide order dated 10th December, 2021.
8. It is submitted that respondent no.2 has settled all her claims in respect of her dowry articles, stridhan, marriage expenses, jewellery, gift items and claims of past, present and future maintenance and permanent alimony with petitioner No.1 and other family members for a sum of Rs. 15,50,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) and all disputes of any nature whatsoever, out of which Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) have already been paid while remaining Rs. 5,50,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) was agreed to be paid at the time of quashing of the FIR.
9. Petitioner no.1 has handed over a Demand Draft bearing No. 715854 for the balance amount of Rs.5,50,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) dated 3rd March, 2022 in the name of respondent no.2 today in the Court. Respondent No.2 has verified the particulars of the Demand Draft to her satisfaction and stated them to be correct.
10. It is prayed that the instant FIR be quashed on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding dated 12th March, 2021 and as per the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303.
11. Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, learned APP for the State submitted that there is no opposition to the prayer made by the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.
12. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
13. The instant criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on the society especially when there is a settlement/compromise between victim and accused. In such cases, it is settled law that High Court is also required to consi
