Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Mohd. Gayasuddin & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 5361 of 2022 & Cr.M.A. 21288 of 2022
Decided On : 14-03-2023
498A/406/34 IPC - Matrimonial Dispute - Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - HMA - Settlement - B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675; K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa, (2013) 5 SCC 226; Yashpal Chaudhrani and Others vs. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) and Another, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8179
Fact of the Case:
The petition seeks quashing of FIR No. 812/2017 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Ranhola, Delhi, based on a settlement between the parties. The respondent/complainant had filed a case under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and a complaint with P.S. CAW Cell, Kirti Nagar, Delhi. The parties arrived at a settlement during the DV proceedings, and the respondent withdrew the petition. The respondent's statement confirmed the settlement and voluntary withdrawal of the petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties had settled their dispute voluntarily and without coercion. Considering the settlement and the grant of talaq, the court concluded that continuing with the FIR and trial would serve no useful purpose. Citing relevant case law, the court held that matrimonial disputes should be put to rest if the parties have reached a genuine settlement. Consequently, the court quashed the FIR and all proceedings emanating from it.
Issues: The main issue was whether to quash the FIR and related proceedings in light of the settlement between the parties and the grant of talaq.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the genuine settlement between the parties, the grant of talaq, and the principle that matrimonial disputes should be put to rest if a genuine settlement is reached. The court relied on relevant case law to support its decision.
Final Decision: The court quashed FIR No. 812/2017 under Sections 498/406/34 IPC registered at PS Ranhola and all other proceedings emanating therefrom.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
1. Present petition has been filed seeking quashing of FIR No. 812/2017 dated 21.11.2017 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Ranhola, Delhi. The said FIR was lodged at the instance of respondent No.2/complainant.
2. Facts as alleged in the petition are that the marriage between Petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2/complainant was solemnized on 23.01.2014 as per Muslim rites and rituals at Delhi. No child was born out of this wedlock. Thereafter the respondent No. 2/complainant left for her parental home on 26.04.2014 for post marriage rituals and returned to her matrimonial house on 30.01.2014. Shortly thereafter, respondent No. 2/complainant was diagnosed with kidney stone on 05.02.2014 and on 13.02.2014 i.e. just around 20 days after marriage she left the matrimonial house. Despite persuasion she did not return to her matrimonial house.
3. It has been submitted that the petitioner No. 1 filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of HMA however the same was disposed of. Respondent no. 2 /complainant filed a case under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) against the petitioners which is pending before the Ld. MM (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Respondent No. 2 also lodged a complaint with P.S. CAW Cell, Kirti Nagar, Delhi. On the basis of which the present FIR No. 0812/2017 u/s 498A/406/34 IPC came to be registered at P.S. Ranhola, Delhi, against the petitioners herein. Charge-sheet has been filed but the Charges are yet to be framed.
4. It has been submitted that while the proceedings under section 12 DV Act were underway, the parties arrived at a settlement. The statement of the parties were recorded and the petition was disposed of as withdrawn on account of settlement arrived between the parties. The same is recorded in the order dated 25.01.2021 of the learned MM (West), Tis Hazari Court, Delhi and is reproduced hereunder:
"MC No.5552362/2016
NAZRANA PRAVEEN VS. MOHD. GAYASUDDIN & Ors.
PS: RANHOLA
25.01.2021 (physical hearing)
File taken up today on a joint application moved on 22 01.2021 on behalf of parties that the matter has been settled.
Present: Petitioner in person with Ld. Counsel Sh. Feroze Ahmad.
Respondent no.1 in person with Ld. Counsel Sh. Vikas Kumar.
Fresh Vakalatnama filed on behalf of petitioner. It be taken on record.
Both the parties have submitted that the dispute pertaining to present case has been settled between the parties out of the Court with the intervention of respectable family members as mentioned in the joint compromise application filed on 22.01.2021.
The matter has been settled between the parties and out of the total amount of Rs.1.5 Lakhs, respondent no.1 has handed over one Demand Draft for sum of Rs.l Lakh dated 20.01.2021 of Punjab National Bank, Patparganj, Delhi to the petitioner. Copy of the same is placed on record and the remaining amount of Rs.50,000/- is to be paid at the time of quashing of FIR.
Petitioner has submitted that in view of the same, she does not wish to pursue the present petition against the respondents and prayed that she may be a lowed to withdraw the present case.
Separate statement of the petitioner has been recorded in this regard and she has been duly identified by her counsel.
In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of as withdrawn as settled.
Application stands disposed of accordingly.
Date already fixed i.e. 24.03.2021 stands cancelled accordingly.
File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
(Aakanksha)
MM (Mahila Court-05), West,
THC, Delhi/25.01.2021"
5. The statement of the respondent No/2/complainant recorded during the DV proceedings on 25.01.2021, before the learned MM (West), Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, reads as under:
"Statement of Ms. Nazrana Praveen W/o Mohd. Gayasuddin D/o Sh. Abdul Halim Rio House No.l48, Gali No.7, Sainik Vihar, Near Aulia Masjid, Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi, Aged about 25 years.
On S.A.
I am petitioner in the
Matrimonial disputes should be put to rest if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement, as established in relevant case law.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to rest when genuine settlements are reached, as emphasized in previous judgments.
Settlement and withdrawal of complaints in matrimonial disputes can be valid grounds for quashing FIRs and criminal proceedings.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement, and the court should ensure that the settlement is voluntary and without coercion.
In matrimonial matters, amicable resolution and the prevention of court process abuse are crucial considerations for quashing FIRs and related proceedings.
In matrimonial matters, amicable settlement and dissolution of marriage as per personal law can lead to quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings.
Cases arising out of matrimonial differences should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement, as held in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa, ....
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, ....
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
