Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 2987/2023
MR. ARUN KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Kamlesh Kumar and Ms. Tripti Kanta, Advs.
Through: Mr. Raguvender Verma, APP for State and ASI Mohd. Naseem Khan, PS Dayal Pur, Delhi.
Date of Decision: 02.06.2023.
JUDGMENT
1. The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No. 112/2021 under section 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Dayalpur.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that Respondent no.2/complainant married petitioner no.1 on 10/07/2019 in accordance with the Hindu Rites and Ceremonies. However, on account of temperamental differences and mental incompatibility, the parties started living separately from October 2019 and instituted multiple litigations against each other and their respective families including the present FIR.
3. 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 19/07/2021. As per the settlement it has been agreed between the parties that the petitioner shall pay Rs 2,40,000/- (Rupees Two lakh forty thousand) in full and final settlement of the entire dispute to respondent no. 2/complainant. Out of the total amount, the Remaining payment of Rs. 74,000/- (Rupees seventy-four thousand) has been made today in the court.
4. Pursuant to the settlement, a mutual divorce petition was also filed and a decree of divorce was granted vide order dated 20/08/2022 passed by Learned Judge, Family Court, North East, Karkardooma Courts.
5. 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. 112/2021 under section 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Dayalpur and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.
6. 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.
7. Both parties are present in court and have duly been identified by the IO. Respondent No. 2 submits that she has entered the settlement voluntarily without any fear, force or coercion. Since the marriage between the parties has also been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent dated 20/08/2022, she has no objection if FIR NO. 112/2021 under section 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Dayalpur and all the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
8. I have gone through the settlement which has been placed on record. The settlement agreement provides for the following terms and conditions:
9. Taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, this court considers that the parties have entered into an amicable settlement out of their own free will, without any fear, force, or coercion and they should be given an opportunity to lead their lives peacefully. No purpose will be served in continuing with the trial.
10. In view of the above, FIR No. 112/2021 under section 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Dayalpur and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
11. The present petition along with all the pending applications stands disposed of.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J JUNE 2, 2023