Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Manish Kumar & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State NCT of Delhi & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 941 of 2023
Decided On : 10-02-2023
Quashing of FIR - Matrimonial Dispute - Sections 406/498/34 IPC - [Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, Jasmair Singh and Another vs. State of Haryana and Another, (2022) 9 SCC 73]
Fact of the Case:
The petition was filed for quashing of FIR no.283/2019 registered under Sections 406/498/34 IPC at PS Shalimar Bagh. The parties had amicably settled and compromised all the disputes between them, and a settlement agreement was entered into. A petition for divorce by mutual consent was filed and the decree of divorce was granted. The settlement agreement specifically stated that it would not affect the rights of the child.
Finding of the Court:
The court observed that FIRs such as in the present case should not be quashed ordinarily, but referred to precedents where quashing was encouraged in circumstances of compromise, especially in matrimonial disputes. The settlement agreement was placed on record, and both parties confirmed that their settlement would not affect the rights and interests of the child. Consequently, the FIR and all proceedings emanating from it were quashed.
Issues: The main issue was whether the FIR under reference should be quashed in light of the settlement agreement and the mutual consent divorce decree.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on precedents such as Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Jasmair Singh and Another vs. State of Haryana and Another, which encouraged quashing of FIRs in circumstances of compromise, particularly in matrimonial disputes. The court also emphasized the importance of ensuring that the settlement would not affect the rights of the child.
Final Decision: The court quashed FIR no.283/2019 registered under Sections 406/498/34 IPC at PS Shalimar Bagh and all the proceedings emanating therefrom, and disposed of the petition.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 3606/2023 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 941/2023
1. The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR no.283/2019 registered under Sections 406/498/34 IPC at PS Shalimar Bagh.
2. Brief facts of the case are that marriage between Petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnised on 21.01.2018 according to Hindu rites and customs. After their marriage, the parties lived together and one child namely Master Pulkit Kumar was born on 05.11.2018 out of the wedlock. However, the parties started living separately in 2019 due to serious differences and temperamental incompatibility. The present FIR was lodged on the statement of respondent no. 2/complainant namely Jolly Taneja. The allegations made in the FIR were regarding the demand for the dowry as well as the mental and physical cruelty inflicted upon the complainant. Allegations were also made against Mahesh Kumar Rathy (husband), Ashok Kumar Rathy (father-in-law), Kiran Kumari (mother-in-law), Harsh Kumar Rathy (jeth) and Richa Rathy (jethani) for criminal breach of trust and criminal intimidation.
3. Pursuant to the lodging of FIR, the investigation was conducted and a charge sheet has been filed under Section 498A/406/34 IPC against the petitioners namely Manish Kumar, Harsh Kumar, Ashok Kumar Radhey, Kiran Kumari Rathi and Richa Kapahi.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have amicably settled and compromised all the disputes between them in respect of FIR under reference. He also states that the parties have entered into a settlement agreement dated 27.11.2021 at Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini, District Court, Delhi.
5. Pursuant to the settlement, a petition for divorce by mutual consent was filed and the decree of divorce was on 25.08.2022 by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, North-West, Rohini Courts, Delhi. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that since no dispute is left between the parties and no purpose would be served by continuing with the trial of the FIR and therefore, the present FIR may be quashed.
6. Ordinarily, FIRs such as in the present case should not be quashed, however, it was observed by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, that it is encouraged to quash the FIR in circumstances wherein a compromise has been achieved especially in those criminal cases which have overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of a matrimonial relationship or family disputes.
7. Recently, the Supreme court in Jasmair Singh and Another vs. State of Haryana and Another, (2022) 9 SCC 73 quashed the proceedings arising out of a matrimonial dispute on the ground that the parties have buried the hatchet and decided to give quietus to the proceedings which were lodged inter se.
8. The settlement agreement dated 27.11.2021 has been placed on record which specifically states that the settlement will not affect the rights of the child in any manner. The terms of the settlement are as under:
"1) It is mutually settled between the parties that parties shall get dissolved the marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent without leveling allegations and counter-allegations against each other in accordance with law before the Court of competent jurisdiction al Delhi.
2) The husband/respondent no.1 shall pay a sum of Rs.11.00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs only) alongwith articles as mentioned an annexure A, lo the complainant/wife, in full and final settlement of all claims of the complainant including all her claims past, present and future arising out of the marriage with respondent no 1 which shall include permanent alimony istridhan, dowry articles, maintenance of complainant and minor child and all other miscellaneous expenses whatsoever
3) The settlement am
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion to quash FIRs, especially in matrimonial disputes, when a compromise has been achieved, as highlighted in precedents such....
Matrimonial disputes should be put to rest if a genuine settlement has been reached by the parties.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of genuine settlements in matrimonial disputes and the court's discretion to quash legal proceedings based on such settlements.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to rest if the parties have arrived at a genuine settlement and obtained a divorce by mutual consent.
The importance of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes and the court's power to quash proceedings under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to rest through genuine settlements, and the rights of children born out of the wedlock should be protected.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement, as established in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003)4 SCC 675; K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa, ....
Matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement.
The court can exercise inherent powers to quash FIRs in matrimonial disputes based on amicable settlements and mutual divorce decrees.
The court can exercise its inherent powers to quash non-compoundable offences based on amicable settlements in matrimonial cases, considering the nature of the offence and the settlement between the ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
