Delhi High Court - Orders
Dr. Suresh Bhalla vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) And Anr on 6 July, 2022
Author: Anu Malhotra
Bench: Anu Malhotra
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 1451/2022
DR. SURESH BHALLA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Jai Singh, Advocate with
petitioner in person.
versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Amit Peswani, Advocate for
Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for State with
SI Shiv Kumar
Mr.Rahul Sharma, Ms.Jyoti Dutt
Sharma and Mr.C.K.Bhatt, Advocates
for R-2 with R-2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
ORDER
% 06.07.2022 The petitioner vide the present petition seeks the quashing of the FIR No.372/2020 Police Station Kishan Garh registered under Sections 498A/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, submitting to the effect that the parties to the petition have since reconciled and are living together without any problems now pursuant to the mediation settlement dated 22.12.2021 which has been arrived at the Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, New Delhi 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 W.P.(CRL) 1451/2022 page 1 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.07.2022 17:29:28 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
petitioner present in the Court today as being the sole accused arrayed in FIR No.372/2020 Police Station Kishan Garh registered under Sections 498A/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and he has also identified the respondent no.2 present in the Court today as being the complainant of the said FIR. He has further testified to the effect that the respondent no.2 and the petitioner no.1 are living together.
The respondent No.2 in her examination on oath affirms the factum of having signed the affidavit dated 1.7.2022 and the mediation settlement dated 22.12.2021 arrived at the Mediation Centre, Saket Courts, New Delhi which she states that she has signed voluntarily of her own accord without any duress, pressure or coercion from any quarter. The respondent No.2 further submits that she has been living with the petitioner peacefully without any problems now along with their two children and that she wants to continue to live with the petitioner and thus she does not oppose the prayer made by the petitioner seeking the quashing of the FIR No. 372/2020 Police Station Kishan Garh registered under Sections 498A/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, nor does she want the petitioner to be punished in relation thereto. The respondent no.2 further submits that she is a PH.D and works as a Scientific Officer, at the Bhaba Atomic Research Centre and that she has made her statement voluntarily of her own accord without any duress, pressure or coercion from any quarter after understanding the implications of the same and that she does not need to think again.
On behalf of the State, there is no opposition to the prayer made by the petitioner seeking the quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the deposition made by the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.07.2022 17:29:28 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
W.P.(CRL) 1451/2022 page 2of 6
respondent no.2.
In view of the factum that the FIR has apparently emanated from a matrimonial discord between the parties which has since been resolved by the reconciliation between the petitioner and the respondent no.2 and as the two children of the parties are now living together, for maintenance of peace and harmony between the parties and for the well being of the children of the parties, it is considered 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.
..................."
W.P.(CRL) 1451/2022 page 3 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.07.2022 17:29:28 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
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 criminalproceedings, 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 W.P.(CRL) 1451/2022 page 4 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.07.2022 17:29:28 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
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 JitendraRaghuvanshi &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 thes ubsequent 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 settled own 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 W.P.(CRL) 1451/2022 page 5 of 6 justice require that the proceedings ought to be Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.07.2022 17:29:28 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
quashed...."
(emphasis supplied), In view thereof, FIR No. 372/2020 Police Station Kishan Garh registered under Sections 498A/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against the petitioner are thus quashed.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
ANU MALHOTRA, J
JULY 6, 2022/SV
W.P.(CRL) 1451/2022 page 6 of 6
Signature
Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:SUMIT GHAI
Signing
Date:07.07.2022
17:29:28
This file is
digitally signed by
PS to HMJ ANU
MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI Item No. 14 W.P.(CRL) 1451/2022 DR SURESH BHALLA Vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR CW-1 SI SHIV KUMAR Police Station KISHAN GARH ON S.A. I am the Investigating Officer of the FIR No. 372/2020 Police Station Kishan Garh registered under Sections 498A/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 . I identify the petitioner present in the Court today as being the sole accused arrayed in the FIR in question and I also identify the respondent No.2 present in the Court today as being the complainant of the FIR in question. The petitioner and the respondent No.2 are living together.
RO & AC ANU MALHOTRA, J
06.07.2022
Signature
Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:SUMIT GHAI
Signing
Date:07.07.2022
17:29:28
This file is
digitally signed by
PS to HMJ ANU
MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI Item No. 14 W.P.(CRL) 1451/2022 DR SURESH BHALLA Vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR CW-2 DR.RUPALI SURESH W/O DR. SURESH BHALLA, AGED 43 YEARS R/O FLAT NO.103, BLOCK-3, AVANTI APARTMENTS, IIT CAMPUS, NEW DELHI.
ON S.A. My affidavit dated 1.7.2022 and the mediation settlement dated 22.12.2021 arrived at the Mediation Centre, Saket Courts, new Delhi bear my signatures thereon which I have signed voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, pressure or coercion from any quarter. I have been living with the petitioner peacefully without any problems now along with our two children and I want to continue to live with the petitioner and thus I do not oppose the prayer made by the petitioner seeking the quashing of the FIR No. 372/2020 Police Station Kishan Garh registered under Sections 498A/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, nor do I want the petitioner to be punished in relation thereto.
I am a PH.D.. I work as a Scientific Officer, at the Bhaba Atomic Research Centre. I have made my statement voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, pressure or coercion from any quarter after understanding the implications of it. I do not need to think again RO & AC ANU MALHOTRA, J 06.07.2022 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.07.2022 17:29:28 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.