Delhi High Court - Orders
Parveen Saini & Ors vs State & Anr on 6 January, 2021
Author: Anu Malhotra
Bench: Anu Malhotra
$~25
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2508/2019
PARVEEN SAINI & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Akash Saini, Adv. with
petitioners
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for
State
Mr. Gurpreet Singh Sachdeva, Adv.
for R-2 with respondent no.2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
ORDER
% 06.01.2021 (through video conferencing) Vide the present petition, the petitioners seek the quashing of the FIR No.204/2018, PS Keshav Puram, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 submitting to the effect that a settlement has since been arrived at between the parties vide a mediation settlement at the Mediation Centre, Saket on 12.04.2019, pursuant to which, all claims between the parties have been settled and the marriage between respondent no.2 and the petitioner no.1 has since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent vide a decree dated 30.11.2019 in HMA No.740/2019 of the Court of the Judge, Family Courts, South-East, Saket.
The IO of the case is present and has identified the petitioners as being the accused arrayed in FIR in question and the respondent no.2 as being the complainant thereof.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.01.2021 18:07:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
The respondent no.2 in her deposition on oath before the Court in reply to specific Court queries has affirmed the factum of the settlement arrived at between her and the petitioner no.1 as also the dissolution of the marriage between her and the petitioner no.1 as aforementioned. She also states that the minor child born of the wedlock between her and the petitioner no.1 is in her custody. She has also stated that she has received back her articles from the petitioners, however, submits that the articles that have been received by her are in a damaged condition. She however submits that she does not oppose the prayer made by the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question. She further states that she is a graduate and is a teacher.
In view of the deposition of the respondent no.2, her affidavits dated 15.07.2019 & 14.10.2019 on the record, it is apparent that a settlement has been arrived at between the parties and thus for maintenance of peace and harmony between them, for the well being of the minor child, 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) ........
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.01.2021 18:07:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
(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 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 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.01.2021 18:07:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
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 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), Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.01.2021 18:07:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
the FIR No.204/2018, PS Keshav Puram, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against the petitioners are quashed.
However, it is essential to observe that in the settlement document that has been placed on record as arrived at at the Mediation Centre dated 12.04.2019 at Saket Courts, there is no mention in relation to the rights qua maintenance or otherwise of the minor child born of the wedlock between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2. However, vide the affidavit dated 14.10.2019 of the respondent no.2 it has been stated that the respondent no.2 has not claimed any maintenance, alimony or any other claim against the petitioners for herself or on behalf of her minor child namely Ansh Saini in terms of the settlement dated 12.04.2019. In relation to the said aspect, it is essential to observe that despite the settlement dated 12.04.2019 arrived at between the parties and despite the terms in the affidavit dated 14.10.2019 vide clause 3 thereof which is also so avers in clause 2 of the affidavit dated 15.07.2019 of the respondent no.2, which reads to the effect:
"That I state that the matter was amicably settled between the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No.2, in which the respondent No.2 is settled all her remaining claims i.e. jewellery, Stridhan, household Articles and, further respondent No.2 has also not claimed any maintenance, alimony or any other claim against the petitioner for herself and on behalf her minor child named "Ansh", vide settlement dated 12.04.2019 before Meditation Centre, Saket Courts, Delhi duly executed between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2."
It is made expressly clear that the said settlement term in relation to the rights of the minor child qua maintenance or otherwise having been given up Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.01.2021 18:07:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
by the respondent no.2 would not amount to any embargo on the minor child born of the wedlock between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 seeking his claims against the petitioners in accordance with law qua maintenance or otherwise.
As regards the submissions made by the respondent no.2 that she has received her goods in damaged condition, it would be open to her to seek any civil remedy, if so advised.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the joint statement of the parties recorded on 30.11.2019 during the proceedings under Section 13B(2) of the HMA it had been stated that the petitioner no.1 would start paying Rs.25,00/- per month in the account of the respondent no.2 qua education and needs of the minor child and also contribute in future for the interest and welfare of the child as his sweet will.
As observed hereinabove it is open to the minor child to seek his claims qua maintenance or otherwise as per requirement and in accordance with law from each of his parents.
The petition is disposed of.
ANU MALHOTRA, J JANUARY 6, 2021 vm Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.01.2021 18:07:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 25 CRL.M.C. 2508/2019 PARVEEN SAINI & ORS. Vs. STATE & ANR 06.01.2021 CW-1 SI Naveen Kumar, PS Keshav Puram.
I am the Investigating Officer of FIR No.204/2018, PS Keshav Puram, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. I identify the petitioner no.1 Mr. Parveen Saini, petitioner no.2 Mr. Jai Bhagwan Saini, petitioner no.3 Ms. Usha Saini, petitioner no.4 Mr. Deepak Saini, petitioner no.5 Ms. Kusum Saini and petitioner no.6 Mr. Dharmender Saini and petitioner no.7 Ms. Veenita Saini as being the accused arrayed therein and I identify the respondent no.2 Ms. Vandana Saini as being the complainant thereof.
ANU MALHOTRA, J RO & AC 06.01.2021 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.01.2021 18:07:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 25 CRL.M.C. 2508/2019 PARVEEN SAINI & ORS. Vs. STATE & ANR 06.01.2021 CW-2 Ms. Vandana Saini, d/o Mr. Manoj Jain, age 29 years, R/o H. NO.3738/2, 2nd Floor, Kanhaiya Nagar, Tri Nagar, New Delhi.
On S.A. A settlement has since been arrived at between me and the petitioners at the Mediation Centre, Saket Courts, which settled had been arrived at voluntarily. As per the settlement terms vide clauses 2 & 3 thereof, it has been agreed to the effect:
"2 It is agreed between the parties that the Second Party Smt. Vandana Jain has surrendered all her rights towards all her claims arising out of the marriage between the parties including maintenance-past, present and future, permanent alimony, istridhan and she will not claim any amount whatsoever from the First Party in future.
3 It is also agreed between the parties that the First Party Sh. Parveen Saini will return / hand over the articles/ goods i.e. one Samsung TV, An Air Conditioner, One microwave, some clothes, one sofa, one washing machine, two press to the Second Party within ten days after recording the statements of the parties in the First Motion."
The marriage between me and the petitioner no.1 has since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent vide a decree dated 30.11.2019 in HMA No.740/2019 of the Court of the Judge, Family Courts, South-East, Saket. The minor child born of the wedlock between me and the petitioner no.1 is in my custody.
As per my affidavits dated 14.11.2019 & 15.07.2019 it has been stated that all my claims stand settled. However, I want to state that the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.01.2021 18:07:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
articles that have been returned to me pursuant to the settlement agreement dated 12.04.2019 have been returned in a damaged condition and would be valued at Rs.62,000/-. However, I do not oppose the prayer made by the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR No.204/2018, PS Keshav Puram, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 nor do I want them to be punished in relation thereto.
I have done graduation and I teach. I have made my statement after understanding the implications thereof and I have made this statement voluntarily of my own accord without any duress or coercion from any quarter.
RO & AC ANU MALHOTRA, J
06.01.2021
Signature
Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:SUMIT GHAI
Signing
Date:07.01.2021
18:07:01
This file is
digitally signed by
PS to HMJ ANU
MALHOTRA.