Delhi High Court - Orders
Akashdeep Singh Monga & Ors vs State Of N.C.T Of Delhi & Anr on 25 January, 2021
Author: Anu Malhotra
Bench: Anu Malhotra
$~45
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 213/2021
AKASHDEEP SINGH MONGA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Nitin Arora, Advocate
versus
STATE OF N.C.T OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State
with SI Ajay Pal
Ms.Neha Kapoor, Adv for R-2 with
R-2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
ORDER
% 25.01.2021 (Through Video Conferencing) Crl.M.A. No. 1092/2021 Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 213/2021 & Crl.M.A. No. 1093/2021 The petitioners No. 1 to 3, namely, Akashdeep Singh Monga, Smt. Jyoti Monga and Vishal Tyagi, vide the present petition seek the quashing of the FIR No. 426/2018, Police Station Madhu Vihar registered 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 during the course of the proceedings in Bail Appln. Nos. B-113/2019, B-114/2019, B-115/2019 before the learned Court of the ASJ-01, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts on 9.5.2019 and pursuant thereto all claims of the respondent No.2 have since been settled and that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.01.2021 15:54:14 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
and respondent no.2 has also since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent under Section 13 B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 vide decree dated 17.2.2020 in HMA 86/2020 of the Court of the Judge Family Court, Shahdara District, Karkardooma and that 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 petitioners No.1 to 3 present in Court today through video conferencing as being the three accused arrayed in FIR No. 426/2018, Police Station Madhu Vihar registered under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the respondent no.2 present in the Court today through Video conferencing as being the complainant of the said FIR.
The respondent no.2, on her examination on oath, in replies to specific Court queries has affirmed having signed her affidavit annexed to the petition in support of the averments in the petition dated 16.10.20 voluntarily of her own accord without any duress, pressure or coercion from any quarter and submits that pursuant to the settlement arrived at between her and the petitioner no.1 during the course of proceedings in Bail Appln. No.s B-113/19, B-114/2019, B-115/2019 before the learned Court of the ASJ-01, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts on 9.5.2019, she has received the total settled sum of Rs. 5,60,000/- from the petitioners of which a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- have been received by her previously and the balance sum of Rs.1,60,000/- has been received by her today vide a demand draft bearing No. 503241 dated 6.1.2021 drawn on the ICICI Bank Ltd. in her favour by the petitioners (copy of the said draft be placed on record by the respondent no.2 today itself) and now there are no claims of hers left against the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.01.2021 15:54:14 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
petitioners. She states that in view of the settlement the marriage between her and the petitioner No.1 has since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent under Section 13 B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 vide decree dated 17.2.2020 in HMA 86/2020 of the Court of the Judge Family Court, Shahdara District, Karkardooma and submits that now no claims of hers are left against the petitioners and she thus does not oppose the prayer made by the petitioners seeking the quashing of the FIR No. 426/2018, Police Station Madhu Vihar registered under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, nor does she want the petitioners to be punished in relation thereto.
On behalf of the State, there is no opposition to the prayer made by the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the deposition made by the respondent No.2.
Taking into account the deposition of respondent no.2 who is apparently educated enough stated to be a graduate and is a school teacher there is apparently no reason to disbelieve her statement that she has arrived at a settlement with the petitioners No. 1 to 3 voluntarily of her own accord without any duress, pressure or coercion from any quarter, in as much as the FIR has apparently emanated from a matrimonial discord which has since been resolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent under Section 13 B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 vide decree dated 17.2.2020 in HMA 86/2020 of the Court of the Judge Family Court, Shahdara District, Karkardooma with all claims of the respondent No.2 having since been settled, it is considered appropriate to put a quietus to the litigation between the parties qua the FIR in question and for the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.01.2021 15:54:14 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
maintenance of peace and harmony between them in view of the observations in the verdict 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 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, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.01.2021 15:54:14 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
(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:27.01.2021 15:54:14 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
FIR No. 426/2018, Police Station Madhu Vihar registered under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the petitioners 1 to 3, namely Akashdeep Singh Monga, Smt. Jyoti Monga and Vishal Tyagi and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are thus quashed.
The petition is disposed of.
ANU MALHOTRA, J JANUARY 25, 2021/sv, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.01.2021 15:54:14 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI NEW DELHI Item No.45 Crl.M.C. No. 213/2021 AKASHDEEP SINGH MONGA & ORS V. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
25.01.2021 CW-1 SI AJAY PAL PS MADHU VIHAR On S.A. I am the Investigating Officer in relation to FIR No. 426/2018, Police Station Madhu Vihar registered under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. I identify the petitioners 1 to 3, namely Akashdeep Singh Monga, Smt. Jyoti Monga and Vishal Tyagi present in Court today through video conferencing as being the three accused arrayed in FIR No. 426/2018, Police Station Madhu Vihar registered under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. I also identify the respondent no.2 present in the Court today through video conferencing as being the complainant of the FIR in question.
ANU MALHOTRA, J RO & AC 25.01.2021 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.01.2021 15:54:14 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI NEW DELHI Item No.45 Crl.M.C. No. 213/2021 AKASHDEEP SINGH MONGA & ORS V. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
25.01.2021 CW-2 AANCHAL SETH D/O AJAY SETH R/O H. NO. 188, ENGINEERS ESTATE, I.P. EXTENSION, PATPARGANJ, DELHI-92 AGED 29 YEARS On S.A. My affidavit dated 16.10.2020 placed on record bears my signatures thereon which I have signed voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, pressure or coercion from any quarter.
In view of the settlement that has been arrived at between me and the petitioner no.1 Akashdeep Singh Monga, during the course of proceedings in Bail Appln Nos. B-113/2019, B-114/2019, B- 115/2019 before the learned Court of the ASJ-01, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts on 9.5.2019, a total settled sum of Rs. 5,60,000/- has been received by me of which a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- has been received by me previously and the balance sum of Rs.1,60,000/- has been received by me today vide a demand draft bearing No. 503241 dated 6.1.2021 drawn on ICICI Bank Ltd. in my favour by the petitioners and now there are no claims of mine left against the petitioners. In view of the settlement the marriage between me and the petitioner No.1 has since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent under Section 13 B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.01.2021 15:54:14 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
Act, 1955 vide decree dated 17.2.2020 in HMA 86/2020 of the Court of the Judge Family Court, Shahdara District, Karkardooma and in view thereof, I do not oppose the prayer made by the petitioners seeking the quashing of the FIR No. 426/2018, Police Station Madhu Vihar registered under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, nor do I want them to be punished in relation thereto.
I have made my statement voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, pressure or coercion from any quarter. I am a graduate and work as a teacher. I have understood the implications of the statement made by me. I do not want to think again.
ANU MALHOTRA, J RO & AC 25.01.2021 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:27.01.2021 15:54:14 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.