SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 1660

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Kulveer Singh & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 5291 of 2022
Decided On : 11-04-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Kunal Punj, Advocate with petitioners, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for State and SI Vandana PS Hari Nagar. Mr. S. Satyanarayan and Ms. Shivani, Advocates, for the Respondent no. 2 with Respondent no.2 through v/c.
Mr. Shakti Chaudhary, Brother of Respondent no.2 in Person.

The court emphasized the use of inherent powers to secure justice and prevent abuse of the court process, while also highlighting the importance of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes.

Headnote:

498A/406/34 IPC - Quashing of FIR - Settlement agreement - Section 13B HMA

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner and the complainant got married but started residing separately due to temperamental differences. The complainant lodged a complaint leading to the registration of FIR no. 404/2019 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC. The parties later entered into a settlement agreement and obtained a mutual divorce decree.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties had amicably settled their dispute and entered into a settlement agreement, leading to the mutual divorce decree. It considered the settlement to be voluntary and without coercion, and thus quashed the FIR and all proceedings emanating from it.

Issues: The main issue was whether the court should quash the FIR and related proceedings in light of the amicable settlement between the parties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the inherent powers under section 482 of the Code to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the court process. It also considered the settlement agreement and the voluntary nature of the settlement, citing previous judgments that emphasized putting matrimonial disputes to rest through amicable settlements.

Final Decision: The court quashed FIR no. 404/2019 registered under Section 498A/406/34 IPC at PS Hari Nagar, and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom. The petition and pending applications were disposed of.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--The present petition has been filed for quashing FIR no. 404/2019 registered under Section 498A/406/34 of IPC at PS Hari Nagar.

2. Facts in brief are that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 namely Mr. Kulveer Singh and Respondent no.2/complainant was solemnized on 29.04.2017 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. No child was born out of this wedlock. Thereafter owing to temperamental differences both the parties started residing separately since 02.10.2018. Consequently, respondent no. 2/complainant lodged a complaint, on the basis of which, the present FIR against the petitioners herein came to be registered. It has been submitted that the Chargesheet has been filed and the matter is pending adjudication before the Ld. MM. West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

3. Learned Counsel further submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have resolved their dispute amicably settled and in furtherance thereof, they have entered into a settlement agreement dated 30.03.2022 before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. As per the settlement it has been agreed between the parties that the petitioner shall pay 14,50,000/- in full and final settlement of the entire dispute to respondent no. 2/complainant.

4. Pursuant to the settlement, a mutual divorce petition was also filed and a decree of divorce was granted vide order dated 07.07.2022 passed by Ms. Renu Bhatnagar, Ld. Judge, Family Court, Tis Hazari Court.

5. Furthermore, the Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that since the parties have resolved all their differences amicably, therefore, it would be in the interest of justice to quash FIR no. 404/2019 registered under Section 498A/406/34 at PS Hari Nagar and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

6. It is settled that the inherent powers under section 482 of the Code are required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of any court. Further, the High Court can quash non-compoundable offences after considering the nature of the offence and the amicable settlement between the concerned parties. Supreme Court and this Court have repeatedly held that the cases arising out of matrimonial differences should be put to a quietus if the parties have reached an amicable settlement. Reliance may be placed upon: 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.

7. Both parties are present in court and have duly been identified by the IO. Respondent no. 2 submits that she has entered the settlement voluntarily without any fear, force or coercion. She submits that other petitions i.e., HMA No.1361/2019 titled 'Shivani v/s Kulveer Singh; Ct. Case No.322/2019 titled Shivani v/s Kulveer Singh, DV complaint case filed by respondent no.2 bearing Ct. Case no. 322/2019, FIR No. 404/2019 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Hari Nagar, Delhi lodged at the instance of respondent no.2 and Crl. M.C. No.5291/2022 titled 'Shivani v/s Kulveer Singh have already been withdrawn or dismissed. And since the marriage between the parties has also been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent order/judgment dated 07.07.2022, she has no objection if FIR no. 404/2019 registered under Section 498A/406/34 at PS Hari Nagar and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

8. I have gone through the settlement which has been placed on record. The settlement agreement provides for the following terms and conditions:

    "(a) Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) shall be paid by the First Party to the Second Party by way of a Demand Draft at the time of recording of statement of first motion petition under Section 13B (1) HMA before the concerned Family Court.

    (b) Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) shall be paid by the First Party to the Second Party by way of a Demand Draft at the time of rec

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top