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) 1738

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Vikash Saini & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 4860 of 2022
Decided On : 11-04-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. D.K. Pandey and Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocates, for the Petitioners.
Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP, for State and SI Naveen Kumar, PS Keshav Puram.

Courts have a duty to encourage amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes.

Headnote:

Settlement Deed - Matrimonial Dispute - The court quashed the FIR and all proceedings emanating from it based on the amicable settlement reached by the parties, citing the duty of courts to encourage amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes.

Fact of the Case:

The parties got married but started living separately due to temperamental differences. The respondent filed a complaint leading to the FIR. The parties later settled the matter through a settlement deed.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties had amicably settled the matrimonial dispute and had voluntarily decided to give quietus to the proceedings. The court considered that there was no purpose in continuing with the trial.

Issues: The issue was whether the court should quash the FIR and proceedings based on the amicable settlement reached by the parties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the duty of courts to encourage amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes, citing precedents such as B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana and Yashpal Chaudhrani and Others vs. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi).

Final Decision: The court quashed the FIR No.816/2021 and all proceedings emanating from it, disposing of the present petition.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been under section 482 Cr.P.C seeking quashing of FIR No.816/2021 registered under section 498A/406/34 IPC at PS Keshav Puram.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the parties got married on 30.11.2020 as per Hindu rites and rituals. There is no child born out of this wedlock. That temperamental differences arose between the parties and they started living separately since 03.02.2021. Thereafter Respondent No.2 filed a complaint on the basis of which the present FIR was lodged.

3. It is submitted that during the pendency of the cases, the parties have amicably settled the matter among themselves vide settlement deed dated 28.04.2022. The settlement was recorded before the Mediation and Conciliation Center, Narnaul, Haryana with following terms and conditions:

Today in the meeting of Pre-litigation Desk Mediation Centre, Narnaul both parties are present. As per settlement between the parties they decided to dissolve their matrimonial relations. It is agreed that the first party will pay Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lakh only) to the second party namely Smt. Ena as permanent alimony and maintenance. It is agreed that a sum of Rs 2,00,000/-(Two Lakh only) will be paid at the time of first mostion statement and reaming amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-(Two Lakh only) will be paid at the time of second motion statement before Hon'ble Family Court, Narnaul. It has also been agreed that both parties will file petition u/s 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act before Hon'ble Court within seven days of this settlement. It has been agreed between both the parties that ornaments which will be gifted to each other at the time or marriage will be returned back by both the parties at the time of first motion statement. Both the parties are bound by the settlement. In case of any litigation pending between both the parties the same will be withdrawn by the concerned parties. Hence, the matter is settled.

4. In pursuance to the settlement deed the remaining amount of Rupees Two Lakh out of a total of Rs. Four Lakh has been paid today vide DD No.485426 in the name of Ena Saini drawn on State Bank of India dated 03.02.2023.

5. Decree of divorce has already been granted vide Order dated 10.11.2022.

6. It has repeatedly been held by the Apex Court that in the matrimonial disputes, if the parties have settled the matter between themselves amicably, it is the duty of Courts to encourage the same. Reliance can be placed on B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003)4 SCC 675; Yashpal Chaudhrani and Others vs. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) and Another, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8179

7. I consider that there would be no purpose of continuing with the trial as the parties have entered into the settlement voluntarily without any fear, force and coercion, and have decided to give quietus to the proceedings. It was a matrimonial dispute which has been amicably settled.

8. In view of the above facts and circumstances the case FIR No.816/2021 registered under section 498A/406/34 IPC at PS Keshav Puram and all the other proceedings emanating there from are quashed.

Present petition stands disposed of.

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