Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 1961

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Mansi Sharma & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State NCT of Delhi – Respondent
Crl.M.C. 5170 of 2022
Decided On : 16-01-2023

Advocates appeared:
Prashant Mendiratta, Ms. Poonam Mendiratta, Arjun Madan and Ms. Aditi Chaudhary, Advocates, for the Petitioners.
Hemant Mehla, APP, for the state.
Ninad Dogra, Advocate, for the Respondents no.2 and 3.

Courts should encourage the settlement of matrimonial disputes through amicable settlement, and if the parties have reached a mutual settlement voluntarily without fear, force, or coercion, it should be accepted.

Headnote:
Settlement - Quashing of FIR - Information Technology Act, 2000, Section 66(D) - Section 13B(1) and 13B(2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Sections 406, 498A, 354, 354A, 34 IPC - Sections 66, 66(C), 66(E), 66(F), 43 of IT Act - Sections 192, 471, 120B, 34 IPC - Settlement reached in matrimonial dispute - Court encouraged settlement in matrimonial disputes - Quashing of FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed for quashing of FIR no.257/2019 under Section 66 (D) of Information Technology Act, 2000, PS Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi, stating that the FIR had emanated from a matrimonial dispute which had been settled through mediation at the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties had reached an amicable settlement at their own free will, without any fear, force, or coercion, and therefore, quashed the FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom.
Issues: The main issue was the quashing of the FIR and related proceedings in a matrimonial dispute.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the encouragement of settlement in matrimonial disputes and cited previous judgments to support its decision.
Final Decision: FIR no.257/2019 under Section 66 (D) of Information Technology Act, 2000, PS Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom were quashed.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)

CRL.M.A. 20643/2022 (exemption)

Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 5170/2022

1. Present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR no.257/2019 under Section 66 (D) of Information Technology Act, 2000, PS Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present FIR was lodged by the opposite party predominantly on the ground that certain emails relied upon by the wife while filing the complaint against the husband was not genuine. The allegations were made regarding use of forged documents, producing false evidence and conspiracy besides the offence under I.T.Act. Learned counsel submits that basically present FIR had emanated out of the matrimonial dispute between Ms.Mansi Sharma and Mr.Dinesh Kumar Sharma. Learned counsel further submits that the matrimonial dispute has been settled at the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre vide settlement agreement dated 24.02.2022. In the settlement agreement Mr.Abhishek Jain, Mr.Avinash Jain, Mrs.Seema Jain, Mr.Aman Jain, Mr.Amit Jain, Mr.Gaurav Rajender Jain, Mr.Naresh Chand Jain and Mrs.Chakreshwari Jain were also duly represented through themselves or through their attorney. It has been submitted that there were various litigation pending between the parties and in the mediation centre, the following settlement was arrived at:

1. That both, Mansi Sharma and Abhishek Jain have agreed to seek divorce by mutual consent in terms of the present settlement/Agreement by filing petitions under Section 13 B (1) and 13 B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Learned Family Com1, Saket, New Delhi. It is agreed between the parties that the First Motion Petition shall be filed by Mansi Sharma and Abhishek Jain within 15 days from the date of signing of the present Settlement Agreement.

2. That it is further agreed between Mansi Sharma and Abhishek Jain that they both shall, within 15 days from the date of the First Motion Petition under Section 13 B (1) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 being allowed, file the Second Motion Petition under Section 13 B (2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in terms of the present Settlement Agreement, which Second Motion Petition shall be accompanied by an application under Section 151 CPC seeking waiver of the statutory period of six months between the First Motion and Second Motion Petition.

3. That it is further agreed between Mansi Sharma and Abhishek Jain that they shall appear through video conference or through their special power of attomey(s), or personally, if so directed by the Hon'ble Court, to record their statement(s) in the Petitions under Section 13 B (1) and 13 B (2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

4. That it is further agreed between the Parties that the Second Party shall file a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi seeking quashing of the FIR No.259/2018 dated 10.10.2018 titled "State V/s Abhishek Jain & Ors." under Section 406/498A/354/354A/34 IPC, P.S. Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi forthwith and expeditiously but not exceeding 15 days from the date of signing of the present Settlement Agreement. In the said quashing petition, the Second Party shall seek stay of further proceedings/investigation in the said FIR bearing No.259/20 18 having amicably resolved all their disputes with the First Party.7 Ms. Mansi Sharma and Shri D.K. Sharma agree and consent that' they shall provide an affidavit/No Objection, passport size photo and all other relevant documents in support of the said quashing petition to be filed by the Second Party, having amicably resolved all disputes with the Second Party in terms of the present Agreement and otherwise cooperate in seeking quashing of the said FIR. The Parties agree that the provisions under which the above said FIR has been registered are non-compoundable but since they are arising out of the marital discord, the First Party shall extend the