Delhi High Court - Orders
Jai Prakash Kaushik & Ors vs State Of Delhi & Anr on 11 November, 2021
Author: Chandra Dhari Singh
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2683/2021
JAI PRAKASH KAUSHIK & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Arvind Vashistha, Adv.
versus
STATE OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for State,
SI Ashwani Kumar PS Jagatpuri
Mr. Ram Lal, Adv. for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
ORDER
% 11.11.2021
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)
1. The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed by the petitioners praying for quashing of FIR bearing No. 91 dated 19.03.2017 under Sections 498A/406/354/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Jagat Puri, New Delhi.
2. All the petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel Mr. Arvind Vashistha Enrl. No. D/3469/2010. Respondent No.2/complainant is also present and has been identified by her counsel Mr. Ram Lal Enrl. No. D/408/98R.
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.
Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2683/2021 Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV Page 1 of 4 Signing Date:11.11.2021 17:45:374. The settlement deed is appended as Annexure P-2 in the petition. As per the terms and conditions of the settlement it is mentioned that the husband has agreed to pay a total sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Only) to the wife towards the full and final settlement which include alimony, stridhan, complete articles, maintenance (Past, Present & Future). The parties have agreed to file petition under section 13 (b) of Hindu Marriage Act (H.M.A.) i.e. for a decree of divorce with mutual consent after signing of this compromise deed.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the divorce decree was awarded vide order dated 05.02.2020 on the mutual consent. It is also submitted that an amount of Rs. 2,00,000 (Rupees Two Lakh Only) has been paid to the wife/complainant at the First Motion and Rs. 2,00,000 (Rupees Two Lakh Only) has been paid during the Second Motion and the remaining amount of Rs. 3,00,000 (Rupees Three Lakh Only) is being paid vide DD No. 505188 in the Bank of India amounting Rs. 3,00,000 (Three Lakh Only) in the name of the complainant. The wife/complainant has verified the said Bank Draft and found all particulars are correct and accepted the said Bank Draft in terms of the settlement deed dated 14.08.2019.
6. Heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. While exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the instant criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences which are private in nature and do not have serious impact on society on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between victim and offender, it is settled law that High Court is also required to consider the conduct and antecedents of the Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2683/2021 Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV Page 2 of 4 Signing Date:11.11.2021 17:45:37 accused as also to set out whether the accused persons have managed with the complainant to enter into the compromise. In the present case, the complainant is present and has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise and settled the entire disputes amicably with petitioner No.1 and his family members without any pressure or coercion. There is also no allegation from respondent No.2 that the conduct and antecedents of petitioners are bad towards the complainant after the compromise. I have perused settlement deed appended as Annexure P-2. As per the settlement deed, the respondent No.2 has received the entire settled amount.
7. 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.
8. Moreover, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. vs. Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr. (2013) 4 SCC 58", have 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 the purpose of securing ends of justice, FIRs or complaints or subsequent criminal proceedings in respect of offences can be quashed.
8. In the instant case, as stated above, the parties have reached on the compromise and amicably settled the entire disputes without any pressure.
9. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and in the light of the other pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2683/2021 Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV Page 3 of 4 Signing Date:11.11.2021 17:45:37 this Court, the present petition is allowed. Accordingly, FIR bearing No. No. 91 dated 19.03.2017 under section 498A/406/354/34, registered at Police Station JagatPuri, New Delhi and all proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
10. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J NOVEMBER 11, 2021 gs Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2683/2021 Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV Page 4 of 4 Signing Date:11.11.2021 17:45:37