IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Shri Himanshu Singhal & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State (Nct) of Delhi & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 4442 of 2023, W.P.(Crl.) 1833 of 2023
Decided On : 04-07-2023
Exemption - Quashing of FIRs - CRL.M.C. 4442/2023&W.P.(CRL) 1833/2023 - IPC 354/354B/323/506/509/34, 498A/406/34 - The court discussed the settlement agreement between the parties, mutual divorce petition, and the exercise of inherent powers under section 482 of the Code to quash non-compoundable offences. The court referred to 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 the quashing of the FIRs.
Fact of the Case:
The parties sought quashing of cross FIR No. 336/2020 P.S. Dwarka South u/s 354/354B/323/506/509/34 IPC and FIR NO. 33/2021 P.S. RoopNagar u/s 498A/406/34 IPC. They had reached a settlement agreement and obtained a mutual divorce decree.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties had amicably resolved their differences, obtained a mutual divorce decree, and voluntarily entered into the settlement agreement. It exercised inherent powers under section 482 of the Code to quash the FIRs and referred to relevant case law to support its decision.
Issues: The issues involved the quashing of FIRs arising from matrimonial differences and the exercise of inherent powers under section 482 of the Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court exercised inherent powers under section 482 of the Code to quash non-compoundable offences after considering the nature of the offence and the amicable settlement between the parties. It relied on case law to emphasize the need to put matrimonial differences to rest if the parties have reached an amicable settlement.
Final Decision: The court quashed FIR No. 336/2020 registered at P.S. Dwarka South u/s 354/354B/323/506/509/34 IPC and FIR NO. 33/2021 registered at P.S. Roop Nagar u/s 498A/406/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom. The petitions were disposed of.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 17004/2023 (Exemption) in CRL.M.C. 4442/2023
CRL.M.A. 16965/2023 (Exemption) in W.P.(CRL) 1833/2023
Exemptions are allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 4442/2023&W.P.(CRL) 1833/2023
1. These are two petitions are seeking quashing of cross FIR No. 336/2020 P.S. Dwarka South u/s 354/354B/323/506/509/34 IPCand FIR NO. 33/2021 P.S. RoopNagar u/s 498A/406/34 IPC.
2. FIR No.336/2020 was lodged on the statement of Mrs. Payal Bagadia wife of Himanshu Singhal against the petitioner No.1 and his familymembers on 16.08.2020.
3. Mrs. Payal Bagadia lodged a complaint before the CAW(Cell), PS Sabji Mandi, New Delhi against the petitioner No.1 and his family members on 12.06.2020 and on the basis of which the second FIR No. 33/2021 dated 21.01.2021 under Section 406/498A/34 IPC was registered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after detailed discussions and Mediation Sessions held by the Ld. Mediator with Petitioners and Respondent No.2 and their respective counsels on 18.04.2023, 20.04.2023, 25.04.2023 and01.05.2023, with the assistance of the Ld. Mediator and their respective counsels, both the parties voluntarily without any force,undue influence, coercion, threat or pressure from any Quarter of society whatsoever have agreed to resolve all their disputes and differences. Accordingly, a Settlement Agreement was executed on01.05.2023 between the parties on the following terms and conditions;
1. That due to ideological and temperamental differences, both, the First Party and the Second Party could not continue the marriage and ultimately have resolved and decided to amicably sever the marital relation between them and lead their lives of their own choice and liking.
2. That both, the First Party and the Second Party have agreed that this Settlement Agreement is entered hereunto on AS IS WHERE IS BASIS i.e. as on the date of signing of this Settlement Agreement, all the articles which are in the possession of the First Party shall remain in the custody and possession of the First Party and she alone shall be the sole and exclusive owner of the same and likewise the articles, if any, which are in possession of the Second Party shall remain in the custody and possession of the Second Party and he alone shall be the sole and exclusive owner of the same. Therefore all the cross claims made by both the parties with respect to Istri-dhan and Gift articles which are said to have been exchanged between the parties either before, at the time of or even after their marriage or as the case may be dowry articles are put to an end and neither of the parties to this Settlement Agreement nor any of their relatives hereinafter will stake a claim for any of the articles of any nature whatsoever.
3. That full and final settlement as agreed and settled by and between both, the First Party and the Second Party in Clause 2 above, the First Party has of her own sweet and free will and volition, without any force, undue pressure or coercion or threat or pressure from any outside quarter whatsoever hereby declares that all her claims with respect to alimony - past, present or future, maintenance-past, present or future, Istridhan, Gift articles/dowry articles, marriage expenses, litigation expenses etc. stands completely settled up to the satisfaction of the First Party and the First Party undertakes that she will not raise any claim of any nature and will not sought any monetary benefit or compensation or financial support on any account whatsoever from the Second Party or his estate under any circumstances whatsoever qua their present marriage.
4. That both the parties have settled all their grievances against each other amicably out of the Court and have agreed and also undertake to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent us 13B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
5. That both, the First Party and the Second Party have mutually agreed to file a joint petition u/s 13(B)(1) of Hindu Marriage Act b
The court can exercise inherent powers under section 482 of the Code to quash non-compoundable offences, especially in cases of amicable settlement in matrimonial differences.
The main legal principle established is the encouragement of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes, as well as the voluntary nature of settlements and the absence of fear, force, or coercion.
The main legal point established is that matrimonial disputes can be settled amicably, leading to the quashing of related criminal proceedings under the specified legal provisions.
The court can quash FIRs in matrimonial disputes when a compromise has been achieved, as encouraged by the Supreme Court.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement, and provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, allow for divorce by mutual consent.
The court emphasized the exercise of inherent powers under section 482 of the Code to quash non-compoundable offences after considering the nature of the offences and the amicable settlement between ....
Courts can quash non-compoundable offences arising from matrimonial disputes if parties have reached an amicable settlement, exercising inherent powers under section 482 of the Code.
The court emphasized the power to quash FIRs in matrimonial disputes when parties reach an amicable settlement, prioritizing justice and resolution over prosecution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the exercise of power under Section 482 of the Code to quash criminal proceedings based on a voluntary settlement between the parties, guided by th....
The importance of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes and the court's power to quash proceedings under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.