Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 1454

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Vikas Bhatnagar & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State Through Sho R. K. Puram Police Station – Respondent
Cr.M.C. 6919 of 2022
Decided On : 27-04-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Sunil Mutreja and Mr. Vedhant Tomar, Advocates, for the Petitioners.
Mr. Raguvender Verma, APP, for the State with SI Priyanka, PS R.K. Puram.
Ms. Shreeya Maggv, Advocate, for the Respondent with respondent.

Matrimonial disputes should be put to rest if the parties have genuinely settled their differences.

Headnote:
498A/406/34 IPC - Matrimonial Dispute - Section 13, HMA - Section 12 DV Act - Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:

The petition seeks quashing of a case FIR registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, arising from a matrimonial dispute where the parties have amicably settled their disputes and obtained a divorce by mutual consent.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties have amicably settled all their disputes, and the complainant does not wish to pursue the present FIR. The court considered it better to put an end to the dispute in matrimonial matters when the parties have arrived at a genuine settlement.
Issues: The main issue was whether to quash the FIR and consequent proceedings in light of the amicable settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on previous judgments to support its decision, emphasizing that cases arising from matrimonial differences should be put to rest if the parties have reached a genuine settlement.
Final Decision: The court quashed the case FIR and all consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--The present petition has been filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of case FIR No. 112/2021 dated 26.04.2021 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at PS RK Puram, Delhi. The said FIR was lodged on the statement of the respondent No.2/complainant alleging therein that the petitioners herein have mentally harassed her and demanded dowry from her.

2. Facts in brief are that the marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent no. 2/complainant was solemnized on 25.11.2016 as per Hindu rites and customs in Delhi. No child was born out of this wedlock. However, owing to temperamental differences the parties started living separately from 21.09.2020. Thereafter, respondent no. 2/complainant got registered the present FIR against the petitioners herein.

3. It has been submitted that thereafter various litigations arose between the parties which include a petition under section 13, HMA bearing HMA No. 640/2020 filed by the petitioner No.1/husband for dissolution of marriage before the Ld. Judge, Family Courts, PHC, New Delhi and a complaint under section 12 of DV Act filed by the respondent No.2/complainant before Ld. MM, Mahila Courts, PHC, New Delhi. However pursuant to the settlement arrived at between the parties, the petition under section 13, HMA and the complaint under section 12 DV Act have both been withdrawn.

4. It has been submitted that while the proceedings were underway, the parties voluntarily and amicably settled the matter vide settlement agreement dated 17.05.2022 on the following terms and conditions:

"1. That the First party shall pay to the Second Party a total sum of Rs.23,00,000/- (Twenty three lacs) in full and final settlement of all her claims, be it towards maintenance (past, present & future), alimony and/or stridhan or articles of personal use. First Party agrees to pay to the Second Party the settlement amount of Rs.23,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs) in the following manner:

i. Rs.8,00,000/- (Eight Lacs) by way of Demand Draft in the name of Second Party payable at Delhi at the time of recording of the statement under Section 13-B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act;

ii. Rs.8,00,000/- (Eight Lacs) by way of Demand Draft in the name of Second Party payable at Delhi at the time of recording of the statement under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act;

iii. Rs.7,00,000/- (Seven lacs) before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, New Delhi in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at the time of giving her No Objection, before the Hon'ble Court, to the quashing of the FIR No.112/21 PS R. K. Puram, New Delhi under Section 498A/406/34 IPC.

2. That First Party and the Second Party made efforts to resolve their differences and make efforts at reconciliation but the said efforts have failed. There is no possibility or probability of Sh. Vikas Bhatnagar of the First Party and the Second Party residing together as husband and wife. Sh. Vikas Bhatnagar of the First Party and the Second Party do hereby give their respective consent for dissolution of marriage between them by a decree of divorce by mutual consent.

3. That Sh. Vikas Bhatnagar of the First Party and the Second Party are living separately from each other ever since 21.09.2020 i.e., for a period of more than 18 months. They agree to move within 1 weeks from the date of signing of this Settlement Agreement, the First Motion Petition under Section 13-B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the court of Ld. Prinicipal Judge, Family Court of competent jurisdiction i.e., Principal Judge, Family Court, Patiala House, Courts, New Delhi.

Sh. Vikas Bhatnagar of the First Party and the Second Party agree to move within 15 days from the date of order in the First Motion Petition, joint application before the ld. Family Court of competent jurisdiction i.e., Principal Judge, Family Court, New Delhi District, Patiala House Court, New Delhi for waiving the statutory period of six months in terms of the case Amarjeet Singh v. Ha