Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 2994

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Vipin Gupta & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State Goverment of NCT of Delhi & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 5235 of 2023
Decided On : 31-07-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Rizwan Ali & Mr. Vikas Dudeja, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP, for State & SI Anil, PS Seemapuri & SI Nathu Ram 1000/SE, Security.
Mr. Gaurav Vashishth, Advocate, for the Respondent-2.

The court can exercise inherent powers to quash proceedings based on an amicable settlement between the parties in matrimonial disputes.

Headnote:
Quashing of FIR - Matrimonial Dispute - Section 498A/406/34 IPC, Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act - 13(B) of HM Act - Settlement agreement - Exercise of inherent powers under section 482 of the Code - Amicable settlement between the parties
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought quashing of a case FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, citing amicable settlement with the complainant after their divorce.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties had amicably settled their disputes, leading to a mutual divorce and a settlement agreement, and concluded that continuing with the trial would serve no purpose.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court should exercise its inherent powers to quash the FIR and proceedings based on the amicable settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the exercise of inherent powers under section 482 of the Code to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of any court. It also considered the settled legal principle that cases arising out of matrimonial differences should be put to rest if the parties have reached an amicable settlement.
Final Decision: The court quashed the FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom, and disposed of the petition along with all pending applications.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)

CRL.M.A. 19914/2023

Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 5235/2023

1. The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of case FIR No. 640/2018 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered at PS Seemapuri, District: Shahdara, Delhi.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that Respondent no.2/complainant married petitioner no.1 on 11.11.2016 in accordance with the Hindu Rites and Ceremonies. No child was born out of the wedlock.

3. However, on account of temperamental differences and mental incompatibility, the parties started living separately since 27.11.2016 and instituted multiple litigations against each other and their respective families including the present FIR.

4. Learned Counsel further submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have resolved their disputes amicably and in furtherance thereof they have entered into a settlement agreement dated 21.02.2019 before the Delhi High Court Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.

5. As per the settlement it has been agreed between the parties that the petitioner shall pay Rs.14,00,000/- (Rs.Fourteen Lakh only) in full and final settlement of the entire dispute to respondent no. 2/complainant.

6. Pursuant to the settlement, a mutual divorce petition was also filed and a decree of divorce was granted vide order dated 24.05.2023 passed by Learned Principal Judge, Family Courts, Karkardooma, Delhi.

7. 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 640/2018 under Sections 468A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered at PS Seemapuri, District: Shahdara, Delhi and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

8. 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.

9. Both parties are present in court and have duly been identified by the IO.

10. Respondent no. 2 submits that she has entered the settlement voluntarily without any fear, force or coercion. She submits that other petitions 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 24.05.2023, she has no objection if FIR no. 640/2018 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered at PS Seemapuri, District: Shahdara, Delhi and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

11. I have gone through the settlement which has been placed on record. Now vide order dated 21.02.2019 both the parties have settled the matter on the following terms and conditions:

"1. It is agreed between the parties that they shall get their marriage dissolved by mutual consent in accordance with law as provided u/s 13 (B) of HM Act.

2. It is agreed between the parties that the husband shall pay Rs.14,00,000/- (Rs.Fourteen Lakh only) to the wife to the wife towards full and final settlement of all her claims arising out of the marriage including stridhan, dowry articles, permanent alimony and maintenance (present, past and future).

3. It is agreed between the parties that the petition for first motion