Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J.
Kushgra Tyagi & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State & Anr. - Respondents
Cr.M.C. 510 of 2024
Decided On : 23-01-2024
Quashing of FIR - Mutual Settlement - The court quashed the FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC as the matter had been amicably settled between the parties without any threat, pressure, or coercion.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 513/2022 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, stating that the marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 was solemnized according to Hindu rites and ceremonies, but due to temperamental differences, they could not live together.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the matter had been mutually settled between the parties without any threat, pressure, or coercion, and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the case pending. Consequently, the court quashed the FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom.
Issues: The main issue was whether the FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC should be quashed in view of the mutual settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that since the matter had been amicably settled between the parties, it would be an abuse of the process of the court to keep the case pending, and therefore, the FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom were quashed.
Final Decision: The court quashed FIR No. 513/2022 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and disposed of the petition accordingly.
JUDGMENT
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 2046/2024
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 510/2024
1. Petition has been preferred on behalf of the petitioners under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of FIR No. 513/2022 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at P.S.: Mansarovar Park.
2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for respondent No.2 alongwith respondent No.2 in person appear on advance notice and accept notice.
3. In brief, as per the case of the petitioners, marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 was solemnized according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 17.11.2021. Due to temperamental differences, respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 could not live together and have been living separately since December, 2021. Further, on the basis of complaint of respondent No.2, present FIR was registered.
4. The matter is stated to have been mutually settled between the parties with the intervention of family members and well wishers in terms of settlement deed dated 14.10.2023. The First Motion of mutual divorce under Section 13-B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act has been allowed by the learned Principal Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar on 17.10.2023 and balance payment in terms of the settlement deed shall be made at the stage of Second Motion of mutual divorce under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
5. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of mutual settlement arrived between the parties, the State has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
6. Petitioners as well as respondent No.2 are present in-person in the Court today and have been identified by SI Abhilash, PS: Mansarovar Park, Shahdara, Delhi. I have interacted with the parties and they confirm that the matter has been mutually settled between them without any threat, pressure or coercion. Respondent No.2 also states that nothing remains to be further adjudicated upon between the parties and she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances, since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose shall be served by keeping the case pending. It would be nothing but an abuse of the process of Court. Consequently, FIR No. 513/2022 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at P.S.: Mansarovar Park and the proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases where matters have been amicably settled between the parties without any threat, pressure, or coercion, it may be an abuse of the pro....
The court has the discretion to quash FIRs in cases where the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, and keeping the case pending would serve no useful purpose.
The court has the discretion to quash an FIR if the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and keeping the case pending would serve no useful purpose.
The court has the power to quash FIRs under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure when the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and keeping the case pending would serve no use....
The court has the discretion to quash FIR and proceedings if the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, and keeping the case pending would serve no useful purpose and would be an abuse....
The court can quash an FIR if the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the case pending.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that an amicable settlement between the parties, coupled with the absence of objection from the State, can be grounds for quashing an FIR.
The court has the discretion to quash FIR based on amicable settlement between the parties to prevent abuse of the court process.
The court can quash an FIR and proceedings if the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, and keeping the case pending would serve no useful purpose.
The importance of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes and the court's power to quash proceedings under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
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
