Varaun Dabas & ORS. v. State NCT Of Delhi And ANR

$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3691/2024 VARAUN DABAS & ORS.

..... Petitioners Through:

Mr Sanjay Rathi, Mr Tarun Choudhary, Ms Manisha Gautam and Ms Diksha Saraf, Advocates.

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents Through:

Mr Hitesh Vali, APP for the State with SI Priya, PS Bawana.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 22.05.2024 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of FIR No.0635/2020 under Sections 376/377/323/109/34 IPC registered at Police Station Bawana and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement.

2.

The petitioner no.1 (former husband), and petitioner nos.2 to 4, who are close relatives of the petitioner no.1, as well as, respondent no. 2 (former wife) are present in the Court and they have been identified by the Investigating Officer SI Priya, PS Bawana.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnized on 27.04.2019 according to Hindu Rites and Customs. No child was born out of the said wedlock. 4.

On account of temperamental issues certain disputes arose between The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

the parties and they started living separately w.e.f. 15.03.2020. The dispute between the parties also led to the registration of present FIR. 5.

During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at a settlement, terms whereof were reduced in writing in the form of Settlement dated 27.04.2019, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure-C to the present petition.

6.

In terms of the said settlement, the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 decided to dissolve their marriage by filing a petition for divorce by way of mutual consent. Accordingly, the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 have obtained a decree of divorce dated 24.01.2023, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure-D to the present petition. 7.

It is a term of the settlement between the parties that the petitioner no.1 shall pay a total sum of Rs.6 lakhs to the respondent no.2 towards full and final settlement of all her claims on account of streedhan, permanent alimony, dowry articles, maintenance (past, present and future) etc. besides all jewellery articles. The entire amount of Rs.6 lakhs has already been paid to the respondent no.2 by the petitioner no.1. 8.

The receipt of entire amount of Rs.6 lakhs is acknowledged by the respondent no.2, who is present in court.

9.

The respondent no.2, on a query put by the Court, states that she has no objection in case the FIR is quashed.

10.

A coordinate bench of this court in 'Rifakat Ali & Ors Vs. State & Anr.' [CRL.M.C. No. 599/2021, decided on 26.02.2021] after referring to three decisions of the Supreme Court, has taken a view that an offence under Section 377 IPC, is though a heinous offence, but where such an offence is invoked in a matrimonial dispute and where the parties have decided to part The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

ways and move ahead in their lives without acrimony against each other, power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised even for an offence under Section 377 IPC on the ground that the dispute is private in nature. The material part of the said decision reads as under:- "....10. A perusal of the three judgments which shows that the Supreme Court has consistently held that the power under Section 482 CrPC should not be used for quashing heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc. since these offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact in society. An offence under Section 377 IPC is a heinous offence and points to the mental depravity of the accused and hence ought not to be quashed by the High Court on the basis of compromise by exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

11. The present case arises out of matrimonial dispute and the allegation has been made by the wife against the husband. The parties have decided to part ways and get ahead in their lives without having any acrimony against each other. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to exercise its powers under Section 482 CrPC even for an offence under Section 377 IPC on the ground that the dispute is private in nature.

12. The learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on orders of this Court in CRL.M.C.830/2019 titled as Dinesh Kumar & Ors. v. State & Anr., CRL.M.C.1613/2019 titled as Anmol Katyal & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr., CRL.M.C. 5216/2018 titled as Gajender Singh & Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. and CRL.M.C. 4117/2018 titled as Joginder Singh Bote & Ors. v. NCT of Delhi & Anr. In all these cases wife has levelled allegation of the husband committing an offence under Section 377 IPC. This Court has exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC and has quashed the FIRs on the basis of the compromise entered into between the husband and wife.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

13. It is made clear that this Court is exercising its powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash an offence of Section 377 IPC on the ground that the parties have compromised the matter with each other only because it arises out of a matrimonial dispute, the allegation has been levelled by wife against her husband of committing an offence under Section 377 IPC and the parties have decided to move ahead in life."... 11.

I am of the view that the same analogy will apply to the offences invoked in the present case.

12.

In view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them.

13.

It is, thus, in the interest of justice that the present FIR and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. 14.

Consequently, the petition is allowed and the FIR No.0635/2020 under Sections 376/377/323/109/34 IPC registered at Police Station Bawana alongwith all other proceedings emanating therefrom, is quashed. 15.

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. 16.

Order be uploaded on the website of this court. VIKAS MAHAJAN, J MAY 22, 2024 MK The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.