Delhi High Court - Orders
Sagar Singh & Ors vs State Through Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 15 December, 2021
Author: Chandra Dhari Singh
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 2499/2021
SAGAR SINGH & ORS ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Naveen Arya and Mr. Shailender
Arya, Advocates
versus
STATE THROUGH NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Ranbir Singh Kundu, ASC (Crl)
with Ms. Sumedha, Mr. Mukul Dagar
and Mr. Agniwesh Singh, Advocates
and SI Upendra Kumar, P.S. Seema
Puri.
Mr. J.S. Bisht, Advocate for R-2
alongwith R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
ORDER
% 15.12.2021
1. The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter "Cr.P.C.") has been filed by the petitioners praying for issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari and quashing of FIR bearing No. 0308/2019 registered at Police Station Seema Puri for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. All the petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel Mr. Naveen Arya and Investigating Officer SI Upendra Kumar, Police Station Seema Puri. Respondent No.2 is also Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV W.P.(CRL) 2499/2021 Page 1 of 5 Signing Date:15.12.2021 17:33:55 present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and the Investigating Officer.
3. On the query made by this Court, respondent no.2 has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise on her own free will and without any pressure. It is also stated by respondent No.2 that the entire dispute has been amicably settled between the parties.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 got married to each other on 19th February 2018 at Krishna Vatika, Sahibabad (UP) according to Hindu/Sikh rites and ceremonies but due to some temperamental differences between them, they started living separately since 16th December 2018. There is no child born out of their wedlock.
5. Despite several efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle the differences. Respondent no.2 lodged the aforesaid FIR against all the petitioners on 7th May 2019.
6. Both the parties entered into settlement before Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi on 2nd November 2019. The terms and conditions of the said settlement are mentioned in para-4 of the settlement deed which is annexed as Annexure C to the petition. On 29th February 2020, as per the settlement deed, complainant/respondent no.2 withdrew the complaint filed by her against all the petitioners under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the concerned Mahila Court, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.
7. Further, in pursuance of the said settlement, the parties moved for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter "HMA"). Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 filed their first motion of the divorce Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV W.P.(CRL) 2499/2021 Page 2 of 5 Signing Date:15.12.2021 17:33:55 petition under Section 13B(1) of HMA on 7th February 2020 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Shahdara, Kardardooma, Delhi. Petition under Section 13B(2) of HMA was filed by the parties and the marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 stood dissolved by mutual consent vide order dated 3rd March 2021.
8. It is submitted that respondent No.2 has settled all her claims in respect of her dowry articles, stridhan, marriage expenses, jewellery, gift items and claims of past, present and future maintenance and permanent alimony with petitioner No.1 and other family members for a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Only) and all disputes of any nature whatsoever, out of which Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs) have already been paid while remaining Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs) was agreed to be paid at the time of quashing of the FIR.
9. Petitioner no.1 has handed over a Demand Draft bearing No.671480 for the balance amount of Rs.2,00,000/- dated 14th December 2021 in the name of respondent No.2 today in the Court. Respondent No.2 has verified the particulars of the Demand Draft to her satisfaction and stated them to be correct.
10. Mr. Kundu, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State submitted that 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.
11. Heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
12. The instant criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on the society especially when that there is a settlement/compromise between Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV W.P.(CRL) 2499/2021 Page 3 of 5 Signing Date:15.12.2021 17:33:55 victim and accused.
13. In such cases, it is settled law that High Court is also required to consider the conduct and antecedents of the accused in order to ascertain that the settlement has been entered into by her own free will and has not been imposed upon her by the petitioner or any person related to him. In the present case, the complainant is present in Court and has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise and settled the entire disputes amicably with petitioner no.1 and his family members by her own free will without any pressure or coercion. There is also no allegation from respondent no.2 that the conduct and antecedents of petitioners have been bad towards her the compromise. As per the settlement, the respondent No.2 has received the entire settled amount.
14. In the case of B.S. Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Ors 2003 (4) SCC 675, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that if for purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of the power of quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
15. Moreover, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. vs. Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr. (2013) 4 SCC 58, has held that criminal proceedings on FIR or complaint can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in appropriate cases in order to meet ends of justice. Even in non- compoundable offences pertaining to the matrimonial disputes, if Court is satisfied that parties have settled the disputes amicably and without any pressure, then for the purpose of securing ends of justice, FIRs or complaints or subsequent criminal proceedings in respect of offences can be quashed.
16. In the instant case, as stated above, the parties have reached on the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV W.P.(CRL) 2499/2021 Page 4 of 5 Signing Date:15.12.2021 17:33:55 compromise and amicably settled the entire disputes without any pressure.
17. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the present petition is allowed. Accordingly, FIR bearing No. 0308/2019 registered at Police Station Seema Puri for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
18. The petition stands disposed of.
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J DECEMBER 15, 2021 Aj Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV W.P.(CRL) 2499/2021 Page 5 of 5 Signing Date:15.12.2021 17:33:55