Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 5518/2022
ARUN CHOWDERY & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Manish Srivastava and Mr. Amit Kain, Advs.
Through: Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP for the State with SI Avaneesh Kumar, PS
Jagatpuri.
Mr. Naveen Singh Negi, Adv. with R- 2.
Date of Decision: : 17th April, 2023
JUDGMENT
1. Present petition has been filed seeking quashing of FIR No. 189/2018 dated 18.07.2018 registered under Sections 498-A/406/34, IPC at PS Jagat Puri, East Delhi. The FIR was lodged at the statement of the respondent No.2/wife.
2. Brief facts are that the marriage between the petitioner No.1/husband and respondent No.2/wife was solemnized on 20.12.2013 as per Hindu rites and rituals. No child was born out of the wedlock. Thereafter due to temperamental differences, the parties started residing separately since April 2015. Subsequently, respondent No.2/wife got registered the present FIR against the petitioners herein. While the proceedings were underway, the parties settled their disputes vide settlement agreement dated 22.03.2021 before the Delhi Mediation Centre, KKD Courts, Delhi on the following terms and conditions:
3. In terms of the agreement, the parties filed for divorce by mutual consent before the Ld. Judge, Family Courts, Shahdara District, Karkardooma Court, Delhi, whereby vide order dated 07.12.2021 the marriage of the parties was dissolved.
4. It has been submitted that the mother of the petitioner No.1 who was also arrayed as an accused in the present FIR has already expired on 08.10.2020 and death certificate of Smt. Sureshwati has already been placed on record. Ld. Counsel submits that as parties have amicably resolved all their disputes, no useful purpose would be served with continuing with the present FIR and seeks quashing of the same.
5. Petitioners are present in person. Respondent No.2/complainant is unable to connect through VC and has been connected through Whatapp video call. All parties have been duly identified by the IO. Respondent No.2/complainant states that she has resolved all her disputes with the petitioners and has no grievance against the petitioners. She states that she no longer wishes to pursue the present complaint and has no objection if the same is quashed. Both the parties have stated that they have entered into the settlement voluntarily without any fear, force or coercion. She has stated that she has already received the entire settled amount of Rs. 18,00,000/- from the petitioner towards full and final settlement of the entire dispute and no further grievance remains. She has stated that she is making the statement voluntarily against all claims (past, present and future) without any fear, undue influence or coercion.
6. I have considered the submissions. Divorce by mutual consent has already been granted to the parties. The complainant/ respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue the present FIR. The chances of conviction would be bleak and remote, given that the complainant does not wish to pursue the present complaint on account of the amicable settlement. In such circumstances continuance of the present FIR would serve no useful purpose and may cause prejudice to the petitioner and be an exercise in futility. I do not see any reason to reject the compromise. This court considers that it is better to put a quietus to the dispute in matrimonial matters where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have amicably resolved their entire dispute. The Supreme Court and this Court have time and again held that cases arising out of matrimonial differences should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement. Reliance can be placed on 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. Taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and the statement of respondent No.2/complainant, the case FIR NO. 189/2018 dated 18.07.2018 registered under Sections 498-A/406/34, IPC at PS Jagat Puri, East Delhi and all the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
8. The present petition stands disposed of.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J APRIL 17, 2023