SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(UK) 686

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Rahul Kumar & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Writ Petition No. 844 of 2021
Decided On : 07-07-2021

Advocates Appeared:
Mohd Umar, Advocate, Lalit Miglani, Advocate, Lata Negi, Advocate

The institution of marriage should be saved unless there are strong reasons to the contrary, and an amicable settlement between the parties can be a strong reason to quash a FIR.

Headnote:

Amicable Settlement - Quashing of FIR - The court quashed the FIR based on an amicable settlement between the parties, considering the institution of marriage and the joint compounding application filed by the husband and wife.

Fact of the Case:

The wife filed an FIR against her husband and in-laws for offenses under Sections 328, 376, 323, 498-A, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The parties later reached an amicable settlement, and the wife expressed her willingness to live with her husband and in-laws.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties had amicably settled the dispute, and the wife no longer had any grievances against the petitioners. Considering the joint compounding application and the fact that the offenses under Section 328 and 376 were allegedly committed prior to the marriage, the court quashed the FIR.

Issues: The main issue was whether the FIR should be quashed based on the amicable settlement between the parties and the joint compounding application, despite some of the offenses being non-compoundable.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that unless there are strong reasons, the institution of marriage should be saved. Based on the amicable settlement and the joint compounding application, the court decided to quash the FIR.

Final Decision: The court quashed the FIR-in-question and allowed the compounding application, disposing of the writ petition accordingly.

JUDGMENT

Ravindra Maithani, J. - Instant writ petition has been filed for quashing of the FIR No.157 of 2021, under Sections 328, 376, 323, 498-A, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar on the basis of an amicable settlement between the parties.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

3. Fir has been lodged by the respondent no.3, who is wife of petitioner no.1. The incident with regard to offence under Section 376 and 328 IPC, according the FIR were committed prior to the marriage between the respondent no.3 and petitioner no.1. The FIR further states that soon after marriage the respondent no.3 was treated illy, she was harassed, beaten and she was tortured.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent no.3 would submit that parties have amicably settled the dispute. Respondent no.3, the wife of petitioner no.1 is staying with him. They are happily married, living in a peace and harmony.

5. Petitioners Rahul Kumar, Rajendera, and Pushpa Devi and Radha alias Choti, who have been identified by Advocate Mr. Mohd. Umar and respondent no.3, Shama Abbasi alias Soniya, who has been identified by Mr. Bilal Ahmad joined the proceedings through video conferencing. Petitioners and respondent no.3 have stated that they have settled the dispute. Respondent no.3 would submit that she is living with her husband and in-laws. She does not want to proceed further and the dispute is settled now. She has no grievances against any of the petitioners now.

6. The State counsel would submit that some of the offences are non-compoundable.

7. As stated that as far as the offences under Section 328 and 376 are concerned, according to the FIR were allegedly committed prior to the marriage between respondent no.3 and petitioner no.1. Petitioner no.1 and respondent no.3 are both husband and wife. They were married in the year 2017. They have a child born out from the wedlock also. A joint compounding application has been filed along with the affidavit of respondent no.3 and petitioner no.1.

8. Unless there are strong reasons, generally the institution of marriage has to be saved. It is such a case. This Court is of a view that based on amicable settlement between the parties, the FIR may be quashed.

9. The FIR-in-question is quashed. Compounding Application is allowed and the writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top