Rakesh Gupta v. The State (NCT) of Delhi & Anr.

1. Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of FIR No. 0188/2023, under Sections 354A/506/509/34 IPC, registered at P.S.: Adarsh Nagar and proceedings emanating therefrom.

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 prosecution, present FIR was lodged at instance of respondent No. 2 who alleged that on 26.01.2022, she was inappropriately touched by the petitioner who had come to meet her motherin-law. Respondent no. 2 also stated that no action was taken against the petitioner despite the fact that respondent No. 2 informed the same to her husband and mother-in-law.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present FIR is an outcome of matrimonial differences between respondent No. 2 and her husband. Petitioner is stated to be merely a family friend of the husband of respondent No. 2 and had been siding with the husband and his family. She further submits that matrimonial differences between respondent No. 2 and her husband have also been settled and the marriage between respondent No. 2 and her husband has been dissolved by decree of divorce by way of mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The disputes between the parties are stated to have been amicably settled in terms of Settlement Deed dated 29.06.2024. Petitioner is also stated to be having clean past antecedents.

5. An amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been handed over to respondent No. 2 today through DD No. 644428 dated 03.10.2024 drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank, in favour of respondent No. 2.

6. Respondent No. 2 submits that since the disputes have been amicably settled between the parties, she has no objection for quashing of FIR.

7. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement between the parties, he has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

8. Petitioner in the present case seeks to invoke the powers under Section 528 of BNSS. The same is to be used to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court. In which cases, the power to quash the criminal proceedings or the complaint or FIR may be used when the offender as well as victim have settled their dispute, would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case and no generalized list or categories can be prescribed. However, the Court is required to give due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence and consider the impact on the society.

9. It may also be observed that heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot be appropriately quashed despite settlement. However, distinguished from serious offences, the offences which have predominant element of civil dispute or offences involving minor incidents, where the complainant / victim also stands compensated for loss, if any, stand on a different footing, so far as exercise of inherent powers under Section 528 of BNSS is concerned. The High Court also is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether there is sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving the charge for the offence charged with. It may also be assessed, if in view of compromise between the parties, the possibility of conviction in such a case is remote and whether continuation of proceedings would cause grave oppression and prejudice the accused.

10. Petitioner and respondent No. 2 are present in person and have been identified by SI Doli, PS: Adarsh Nagar. I have interacted with the parties and they confirm that the matter has been amicably settled between them without any threat, pressure or coercion. Respondent No. 2 also states that she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

11. Petitioner and respondent No.2 intend to put quietus to the proceedings arising out of matrimonial differences between respondent No. 2 and her husband. The settlement shall promote harmony between the parties. Also the chances of conviction are bleak in view of amicable settlement between the parties. Further, no past involvement of the petitioner has been brought to the notice of this Court.

12. 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. 0188/2023, under Sections 354A/506/509/34 IPC, registered at P.S.: Adarsh Nagar and proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed.

13. In the facts and circumstances, instead of imposing the costs upon the petitioner, he is directed to plant 25 saplings of Neem / Jamun trees each, which are upto 03 feet in height in the area of P.S.: Adarsh Nagar after getting in touch with the competent authority (i.e. Horticulture Department of MCD / DDA/ Conservator of Forests, Department of Forests & Wildlife, Govt. of NCT of Delhi) through IO / SHO, P.S.: Adarsh Nagar. The photographs of planted saplings alongwith report of IO / SHO concerned shall be forwarded to this Court within eight weeks. Further, the upkeep of the saplings / trees shall be undertaken by the authorities concerned. In case of non compliance of directions for planting of trees, the petitioner shall be liable to deposit cost of Rs. 25,000/- each with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority. Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Trial Court for information.

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J. OCTOBER 16, 2024 p