Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Sh. Nishant Walia & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 2876 of 2023
Decided On : 25-04-2023
498A/406/34 IPC - Quashing of FIR - Settlement and mutual consent divorce - Sections 498A/406/34 IPC - 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 petitioner sought quashing of a case FIR No.0061/2021 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at PS Jaitpur, South-East Delhi, as the parties had amicably settled their disputes and obtained mutual consent divorce.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complainant no longer wished to pursue the FIR, and the chances of conviction were bleak given the amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce. The court considered it better to put an end to the dispute in matrimonial matters when the parties have genuinely settled.
Issues: Quashing of FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, settlement and mutual consent divorce.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that in matrimonial matters, if the parties have arrived at a genuine settlement, it is better to put an end to the dispute. The court relied on B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa, and Yashpal Chaudhrani and Others vs. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) and Another to support its decision.
Final Decision: The court quashed the case FIR No.0061/2021 and all proceedings emanating therefrom, considering the amicable settlement and mutual consent divorce.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 10786/2023 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 2876/2023
1. This is a petition for quashing of case FIR No.0061/2021 dated 08.02.2021 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at PS Jaitpur, South-East Delhi. The said FIR was lodged at the complaint of the respondent No.2/wife.
2. Facts in brief are that the marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent no. 2/complainant was solemnized on 26.04.2018 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 August 2020. Thereafter, respondent no. 2/complainant got registered a complaint before CAW Cell, Niwaspur Delhi which culminated into the present FIR against the petitioners. Chargesheet is stated to have been filed and the matter is pending adjudication before the learned MM, Saket Courts, Delhi.
3. Besides the present FIR, the Respondent. No.2 filed a complaint u/s 12 of DV Act against the petitioners which is pending before the court of Ld. MM, THC, Delhi. It has been submitted that however, while the proceedings were underway the parties amicably settled all their disputes, and it was agreed that the parties will file for mutual divorce.
4. Ld. Counsel submits that the parties have now amicably resolved all their disputes vide Settlement-cum-Compromise Deed dated 11.10.2022 on the following terms and conditions:
"1. That both the parties mutually agreed that the second party will pay a total settlement amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lacs only) for the permanent, future alimony of the first party as full and final settlement amount.
2. That the first party shall withdraw the complaint case U/S 12 of D.V. Act listed for 27.10.2022 pending in the Ld. Court of Ms. Jyoti Maheshwari, Ld. M.M. (Mahila Court) Distt. Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and the second party shall pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) through DD/RTGS at the time of withdrawing the said case.
3. That as settled, both the parties shall file the petition under Section 13-B (1) of HMA for granting the divorce by way of mutual consent. The second party shall pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lacs only) to the first party - at the time of recording the statement of the parties in the First Motion divorce petition.
4. That the first party shall withdraw the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on the same day when the first motion divorce petition listed/allowed for recording the statement of the parties.
5. That after the expiry of one month, both the parties shall file the second motion petition under Section 13-B (2) of HMA with application for waiving of six months statutory period, the second party shall pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lacs only) to the first party at the time of recording the statement in the said petition.
6. That thereafter, second party shall file petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR Bearing No.61/2021; P.S. Jaitpur, New Delhi; U/S 406/498- A/506/34 IPC; against the accused persons. The second party shall pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lacs only) to the First Party before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at the time of quashing of said FIR. The First Party shall cooperate and give her No Objection/Affidavit in filing and quashing of the FIR in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
7. That the second party shall withdraw the petition under Section 13 (ia) of HMA filed against the first party before the Principal Judge, Family Courts, District Court Gurugram at Gurugram (Haryana).
8. That it is agreed between the parties to cooperate in signing, filing and completion of second motion as and when called by the Hon'ble Family Court, Distt. Central Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Both the parties will bear own litigation expenses/charges.
9. That it is agreed between the parties that the First party will have no right
In matrimonial matters, genuine settlements between parties should lead to the quashing of FIRs, as established by relevant case law.
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.
In matrimonial matters, genuine settlement and mutual divorce can be valid grounds for quashing FIR and proceedings.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus through genuine settlements, and continuing with the FIR may serve no useful purpose if the parties have amicably resolved their disputes.
The voluntary and amicable nature of a settlement in cases arising from matrimonial differences can be a basis for quashing non-compoundable offences under relevant legal provisions.
High Courts can quash non-compoundable offences in matrimonial disputes if parties reach an amicable settlement, as established in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana and other precedents.
The importance of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes and the court's power to quash proceedings under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The court can exercise inherent powers to quash FIRs in matrimonial disputes based on amicable settlements and mutual divorce decrees.
Cases arising from matrimonial differences should be put to a quietus if the parties have amicably resolved their disputes.
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.
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
