IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Manjeet Patwa – Appellant
Versus
State & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 6468 of 2022,Cr.M.A. 25195 of 2022
Decided On : 03-03-2023
Quashing - Matrimonial Dispute - Settlement Deed - IPC 498A/406/34 - Settlement deed dated 18.10.2021 - Decree of divorce by mutual consent - Quashing of FIR No. 245/2018
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed for quashing of FIR No. 245/2018 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at PS Mundka, which was lodged by the respondent No.2/wife. The parties had settled their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre and obtained a decree of divorce by mutual consent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the settlement between the parties was genuine and voluntary, and the continuance of the FIR would serve no useful purpose. The court also considered the grant of decree of divorce and the settled nature of the dispute, leading to the quashing of the FIR and all proceedings emanating from it.
Issues: Quashing of FIR No. 245/2018 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC
Ratio Decidendi: Cases arising out of matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement. The settlement between the parties and the grant of decree of divorce led to the quashing of the FIR and all proceedings emanating from it.
Final Decision: The court quashed FIR No. 245/2018 dated 06.06.2018 registered at PS Mundka, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No. 245/2018 dated 06.06.2018 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at PS Mundka. The said FIR was lodged at the complaint of the respondent No.2/wife.
2. Facts in brief are that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 namely Mr. Manjeet Patwa and Respondent No.2/complainant was solemnized on 07.07.2014 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. One child namely Arijit Patwa was born out of this wedlock. Thereafter owing to temperamental differences the marriage between the parties could not succeed and as a result the respondent No.2/complainant went back to her parental home and started residing there. Thus, the parties started residing separately from 03.04.2017.
3. Consequently, respondent no. 2/complainant lodged the present FIR dated 06.06.2018 against the petitioners. It has been submitted that the Chargesheet has been filed and charges have been framed and the matter is pending adjudication before the Ld. MM. (Mahila) West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
4. However, with the intervention of family members and well-wishers both the parties amicably settled all their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi by way of a settlement deed dated 18.10.2021 on the following terms and conditions:
"1. It is agreed between the parties that they shall dissolve their marriage by obtaining a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent/court decree in the concerned court in Delhi.
2. It has been agreed between the parties that the respondent/husband Mr. Manjeet Patwa Kumar shall pay a total sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees two lacs fifty thousand only) to complainant/wife Ms. Varsha towards full and final settlement of all her claims including istridhan, maintenance (present, past and future) and permanent alimony, marriage articles/jewellery etc.
3. It has been agreed between the parties that the above said settlement amount shall be paid by the respondent/husband to complainant/wife in three installments, in the following manner:
(i) 1st installment of Rs.83,000/- (Rupees eighty three thousand only) shall be paid by way of DD in the name of complainant/wife before the concerned Ld. Family Court, Delhi at the time of recording statements of the parties in first motion petition for mutual divorce which shall be filed on or before 25.10.2021.
(ii) 2nd installment of Rs.83,000/- (Rupees eighty three thousand only) shall be paid by way of DD in the name of complainant/wife at the time of recording of statement of the parses in second motion petition for mutual divorce which shall be filed within 15 days from passing of order of first motion.
(iii) 3rd installment of Rs.84,000/- (Rupees eighty four thousand only) shall be paid by way of DD in the name of complainant/wife at the time of recording of statement before the Hon'ble High Court for quashing of FIR No. 245/18. The petition for quashing of present FIR shall be moved by the respondent/husband & his family members within 30 days after passing of decree of divorce by mutual consent. The complainant shall cooperate to give statement, affidavit/NOC and to do all these acts which may be required to be done before concerned Hon'ble High Court for quashing of present FIR.
4. It is stated that at the time of recording statements at first motion, the complainant/wife shall also sign petition for second motion for mutual divorce as well as petition for quashing present FIR if the same are readily prepared by their counsels.
5. It is further agreed that the permanent custody of minor child master Arijit shall remain with his father Sh. Manjeet Patwa and complainant/wife Ms. Varsha shall not claim custody/visitation rights of said child in future through any forum.
6. That in case of default from either side in carrying out the terms of this settlement, he/she shall be liable to pay a sum of Rs.50,000-(Rupees fifty thousand only) by way of penalty/compensation to the other side besid
Matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement.
Genuine settlements in matrimonial disputes should be given importance, and the court may quash FIRs and their proceedings based on such settlements.
The main legal point established is that in matrimonial disputes, genuine settlements should be given importance, and if the parties have amicably resolved their disputes, the cases should be put to ....
Matrimonial disputes should be put to rest through genuine settlements, and the rights of children born out of the wedlock should be protected.
In matrimonial matters, genuine settlements should be respected, and cases arising from such disputes should be put to rest if the parties have arrived at a genuine settlement.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to rest if the parties have arrived at a genuine settlement and obtained a divorce by mutual consent.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement, and provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, allow for divorce by mutual consent.
The main legal point established is that matrimonial disputes can be settled amicably, leading to the quashing of related criminal proceedings under the specified legal provisions.
The court can exercise inherent powers under section 482 of the Code to quash non-compoundable offences after considering the nature of the offence and the amicable settlement between the parties.
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, ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.