Delhi High Court - Orders
Vikas Saini & Ors vs State Through Sho & Anr on 26 August, 2022
Author: Anu Malhotra
Bench: Anu Malhotra
$~27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 1501/2022
VIKAS SAINI & ORS. ..... Petitioner
Through: Petitioners in person with Mr.
Rajeshwar Singh & Ms. Neeraj Singh,
Advocates.
versus
STATE THROUGH SHO & ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Aaliya Waziri, Advocate on
behalf of Ms. Nandita Rao, ASC for
State with SI Ramawati, PS North
Rohini.
R-2 in person with Mr. S.S. Saini,
Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
ORDER
% 26.08.2022 The petitioners, vide the present petition seek the quashing of the FIR No.403/2021, Police Station North Rohini under Sections 498A/406/34/377/354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 submitting to the effect that a settlement has since been arrived at between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2, that the marriage between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 has since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the HMA, 1955 in DMC No.476/2022 vide a decree dated 18.07.2022 of the Court of the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonipat, that all claims of the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:26.08.2022 19:46:48 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
respondent no.2 stand settled by the payment of Rs.12 Lakhs to the respondent no.2 by the petitioners and no useful purpose would be served by the continuation of the proceedings qua the FIR in question.
The Investigating Officer of the case is present and has identified the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 i.e. petitioner no.1 Vikas Saini, petitioner no.2 Jagbir @ Jagdish Saini and petitioner no.3 Suresh Rani against whom there are allegations qua the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and has stated that the allegations qua the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 377/354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 relate to the petitioner no.1 only.
The respondent no.2 in her deposition on oath in replies to specific Court queries affirms having signed her affidavit placed on record at pages 54 & 55 to the petition in support of the averments made in the petition as her non-opposition to the prayer made by the petitioners seeking the quashing of the FIR No.403/2021, Police Station North Rohini under Sections 498A/406/34/377/354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as the settlement document dated 28.05.2022 arrived at between her and the petitioner no.1 qua which she states that she has signed both these documents voluntarily of her own accord without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter. She also affirms the factum of the receipt of the total settled sum of Rs.12 Lakhs from the petitioners and states that there are now no claims of hers left against the petitioners. She has also affirms the factum of the dissolution of her marriage with the petitioner no.1 vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent aforementioned and states that there is no child born of the wedlock between her and the petitioner no.1. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:26.08.2022 19:46:48 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
She further states that in view of the settlement arrived at between her and the petitioners, she does not oppose the prayer made by the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 seeking the quashing of the FIR No.403/2021, Police Station North Rohini under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and by the petitioner no.1 under Sections 498A/406/34/377/354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 nor does she want them to be punished in relation thereto. She further states in reply to a specific Court query that she is a graduate and is a teacher in a KVS School and has understood the implications of the statement made by her and that she has arrived at a settlement with the petitioners voluntarily of her own accord without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter and does not need to think again.
On behalf of the State, the counsel present on behalf of the learned ASC for the State submits that there is no opposition to the prayer made by the petitioners seeking the quashing of the FIR in question. The proceedings of the date 12.07.2022 also reflect to similar effect when the matter had been deferred for submission of the decree of divorce being placed on record.
In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the identification of the parties by the Investigating Officer of the case, the non- opposition on behalf of the State and as there appears no reason to disbelieve the statement made by the respondent no.2 that she has arrived at a settlement with the petitioners voluntarily of her own accord without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter, in as much as, the FIR has apparently emanated from a matrimonial discord between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 which has since been resolved by the dissolution of their marriage vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent, for maintenance of peace and harmony between the parties, it is considered Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:26.08.2022 19:46:48 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
appropriate to put a quietus to the litigation between the parties in terms of the verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narender Singh & Ors. V. State of Punjab; (2014) 6 SCC 466 wherein it has been observed vide paragraph 31(IV) to the effect:-
"31. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:
(I) ........
(II) ........
(III) ........
(IV) On the other, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.
..................."
and in view of the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, to the effect : -
"58............................ No doubt, crimes are acts which have harmful effect on the public and consist in wrongdoing that seriously endangers and threatens the well-being of the society and it is not safe to leave the crime-doer only because he and the victim have settled the dispute amicably or that the victim has been paid compensation, yet certain crimes have been made compoundable in law, with or without the permission of the court. In respect of serious offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., or other offences of mental depravity under Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:26.08.2022 19:46:48 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
IPC or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes, like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, the settlement between the offender and the victim can have no legal sanction at all. However, certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or the family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable, the High Court may within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated. The above list is illustrative and not exhaustive. Each case will depend on its own facts and no hard-and-fast category can be prescribed." [Refer to B.S. Joshi, (2003) 4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant, (2008) 9 SCC 677 and Manoj Sharma, (2008) 16 SCC 1.]"
and in view of the verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr. (2013) 4 SCC 58, to the effect : -
"15. In our view, it is the duty of the courts to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes, particularly, when the same are on considerable increase. Even if the offences are non-compoundable, if they relate to matrimonial disputes and the Court is satisfied that the parties have settled the same amicably and without any pressure, we hold that for the purpose of securing ends of justice, Section 320 of the Code Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:26.08.2022 19:46:48 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing of FIR, complaint or the subsequent criminal proceedings.
16. There has been an outburst of matrimonial disputes in recent times. They institution of marriage occupies an important place and it has an important role to play in the society. Therefore, every effort should be made in the interest of the individuals in order to enable them to settle down in life and live peacefully. If the parties ponder over their defaults and terminate their disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law, in order to do complete justice in the matrimonial matters, the courts should be less hesitant in exercising their extraordinary jurisdiction. It is trite to state that the power under Section 482 should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection only when the Court is convinced, on the basis of material on record, that allowing the proceedings to continue would be an abuse of process of court or that the ends of justice require that the proceedings ought to be quashed....",-
(emphasis supplied), in view thereof, FIR No.403/2021, Police Station North Rohini under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 i.e. petitioner no.1 Vikas Saini, petitioner no.2 Jagbir @ Jagdish Saini and petitioner no.3 Suresh Rani and under Section 377/354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the petitioner no.1 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are thus quashed.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
ANU MALHOTRA, J AUGUST 26, 2022 nc Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:26.08.2022 19:46:48 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI ITEM No.27 W.P.(CRL) 1501/2022 VIKAS SAINI & ORS. versus STATE THROUGH SHO & ANR. 26.08.2022 CW-1 SI Ramawati, PS North Rohini. ON S.A. I am the Investigating Officer of the FIR No.403/2021, Police Station North Rohini under Sections 498A/406/34/377/354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
I identify the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 i.e. petitioner no.1 Vikas Saini, petitioner no.2 Jagbir @ Jagdish Saini and petitioner no.3 Suresh Rani present today in Court as being the three accused arrayed in the aforesaid FIR and I also identify the respondent no.2 Ms. Heena Saini present today in Court as being the complainant thereof.
The offences invoked under Section 377 & 354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 are against the petitioner no.1 only.
RO & AC ANU MALHOTRA, J
26.08.2022
Signature
Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:SUMIT GHAI
Signing
Date:26.08.2022
19:46:48
This file is
digitally signed by
PS to HMJ ANU
MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI ITEM No.27 W.P.(CRL) 1501/2022 VIKAS SAINI & ORS. versus STATE THROUGH SHO & ANR. 26.08.2022 CW-2 Ms. Heena Saini, D/o Sh. Kuldeep Saini, aged 27 years, R/o HOUSE NO.28, NAHARPUR VILLAGE, ROHINI SECTOR 7 SARASWATI VIHAR, DELHI-110085.
ON S.A. My affidavit placed on record at pages 54 & 55 to the petition in support of the averments made in the petition as my non-opposition to the prayer made by the petitioners seeking the quashing of the FIR No.403/2021, Police Station North Rohini under Sections 498A/406/34/377/354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as the settlement document dated 28.05.2022 arrived at between me and the petitioner no.1 bear my signatures thereon, which I have signed voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter.
In terms of the said settlement arrived at between me and the petitioner no.1, I have received the total settled sum of Rs.12 Lakhs from the petitioners and there are now no claims of mine left against the petitioners. The marriage between me and the petitioner no.1 has since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the HMA, 1955 in DMC No.476/2022 vide a decree dated 18.07.2022 of the Court of the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonipat. There is no child born of the wedlock between me and the petitioner no.1.
In view of the settlement arrived at between me and the petitioners, I Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:26.08.2022 19:46:48 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
do not oppose the prayer made by the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 seeking the quashing of the FIR No.403/2021, Police Station North Rohini under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and by the petitioner no.1 under Sections 498A/406/34/377/354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 nor do I want them to be punished in relation thereto.
I am a graduate and a teacher in a KVS School. I have made my statement after understanding the implications thereof voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter and I do not need to think again.
RO & AC ANU MALHOTRA, J
26.08.2022
Signature
Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:SUMIT GHAI
Signing
Date:26.08.2022
19:46:48
This file is
digitally signed by
PS to HMJ ANU
MALHOTRA.