Point of Law: Occasion to consider the issue as to whether an FIR lodged for the 2 offences punishable under sections 307 and 34 IPC could be quashed on the basis of the settlement between the parties

ORDER

1. Rule. Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Mr. Kuldeep Mehta, learned advocate, waive service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent Nos.1 & 2 respectively.

2. This application has been filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside the FIR being CR. No.I- 41 of 2019 against the applicants registered with Mahila Police Station, Dist.: Bhuj for offfences punishable under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506(2), 114 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Mr. Ashish Dagli, learned advocate for the applicants, submitted that the matrimonial issues have been settled and the parties have mutually separated by decree of divorce and there remains no grievance between them. It was submitted that the complainant and the applicant No.1 had voluntarily filed Application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for Decree of Divorce before the Court of Principal Family Judge, Bhuj vide Family Suit No.37/2017 and the said Application was allowed by order dated 7.4.2021 and, therefore, in the larger interest of the society, the impugned complaint may be quashed and set aside.

3.1 Learned advocate submitted that the Court may verify the said aspect from the original complainant, respondent no.2.

4. Mr. Kuldip Mehta, learned advocate for respondent no.2, original complainant, concurred with the factum of settlement of the dispute, as advanced by learned advocate Mr. Ashish Dagli appearing for the applicants.

5. The Respondent No.2- complainant is present before the virtual court. The virtual Court verified about the settlement arrived at between the parties and the fact regarding dissolution of the marriage between the Respondent No.2 - complainant and the applicant No.1. The respondent no.2, original complainant, categorically stated that she has no grievance against the applicants and that she has no objection to the quashment of the impugned first information report filed by her.

6. Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP submitted that any First Information Report should be quashed in accordance with the guidelines of the Apex Court and the parameters laid down therein.

7. This Court has heard the learned advocates on both the sides and has perused the material on record. The respondent no.2 – original complainant affirmed that dispute with the applicant has been amicably resolved with the intervention of friends and relatives and the settlement has been arrived at between the parties and all the house-hold items as well as Permanent Alimony/ Maintenance has been given to the Respondent No.2. The Affidavit by Respondent No.2- original complainant as well as the order dated 7.4.2021 passed passed by Principal Family Judge, Bhuj vide Family Suit No.37/2017 allowing the application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for Decree of Divorce is also on record.

8. In the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and another V. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and others, reported in 2018 (10) SCC 443, the Apex Court made an elaborate discussion on the scope and powers of the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. in matrimonial matters. The observations made in paragraphs- 15, 39 and 40 are relevant. It read thus:-

“15. On the aforesaid bedrock, a prayer in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015 has been made to have a uniform policy of registration of FIR, arrest and bail in cases of Section 498-A IPC. It is worthy to note here that during the pendency of this Writ Petition, the judgment had been pronounced in Rajesh Sharma (supra). The Court in Rajesh Sharma (supra) issued the following guidelines:-

“19.(i) (a) In every district one or more Family Welfare Committees be constituted by the District Legal Services Authorities preferably comprising of three members. The constitution and working of such committees may be reviewed from time to time and at least once in a year by the District and Sessions Judge of the district who is also the Chairman of