Gaurav & ORS. v. The State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi)Ps Binda Pur & ANR.

$~103 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 9179/2024 GAURAV & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Vipin Tiwari, Advocate.

Mr. Harsh Yadav, Advocate.

Mr. Suryavat Dubey, Advocate.

versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)PS BINDA PUR & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for the State.

Mr. Harsh Saini and Mr. Saksham Gupta, Advocates for R-2/Claimanat.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH

O R D E R

% 25.11.2024 CRL.M.A. 35149/2024 (Exemption).

1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

Application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 9179/2024.

3.

The instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter "BNSS) (earlier Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(hereinafter "Cr.P.C.") has been filed by the petitioners praying for quashing of FIR bearing No. 109/2020 registered at Police Station Binda Pur, New Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter "IPC"). The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

4.

The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no.2 got solemnized on 10th February, 2019 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies but due to some temperamental differences between them, they started living separately since 29th October, 2019. No child was born out of their wedlock.

5.

Despite several efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle the differences. The respondent no. 2 lodged the present FIR on 23rd January, 2020. The police completed the investigation and filed the chargesheet on 10th January, 2021 against the petitioners before the learned Trial Court.

6.

With the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties entered into settlement vide Settlement Agreement dated 17th May, 2024. The terms and conditions of the said settlement are mentioned in the Settlement Agreement which is annexed as Annexure P-3 to the petition. 7.

On 30th July, 2024, the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 filed a joint petition under Section 13-B (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter "HMA") before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, South West District, Dwarka Courts, Delhi and vide judgment/order dated 30th July, 2024, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, South West District, Dwarka Courts, Delhi allowed the first motion. 8.

Thereafter, on 15th October, 2024, petition under Section 13(B)(2) of HMA was allowed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, South West District, Dwarka Courts, Delhi and the parties were granted decree of divorce under Section 13-B (2) of the HMA.

9.

It is submitted that respondent no.2 has fully settled all her claims in respect of her dowry, stridhan, execution and claims of past, present and The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

future maintenance qua this marriage with the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 9,50,000/- and admitted gold articles i.e., one gold chain and three gold rings, out of which the remaining amount of Rs.2,50,000/- was agreed to be paid at the time of quashing of the FIR. It is submitted that the respondent no. 2 has already received a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- and admitted gold articles as per the terms of the Settlement Agreement. 10.

The petitioner no. 1 has handed over a Demand Draft bearing No.185783 for the balance amount of Rs.2,50,000/- dated 18th November, 2024 in the name of respondent no.2 today in the Court. The respondent no.2 has verified the particulars of the Demand Draft to her satisfaction and stated them to be correct.

11.

All the petitioners are present before this Court before this Court. They have been identified by their counsel, Mr. Vipin Tiwari, Advocate and the concerned Investigating Officer. The respondent no. 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by her Counsel Mr. Harsh Saini and the Investigating Officer.

12.

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. The parties also undertook that they shall abide by the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement arrived at between the parties. 13.

It is prayed that the instant FIR be quashed on the basis of Settlement Agreement dated 17th May, 2024, in accordance with the settled law on this point as posited by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 14.

Learned APP for the State submitted that there is no opposition to the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

prayer made on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 15.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 16.

The instant criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on the society especially when there is a settlement/compromise between victim and accused. 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 the petitioners 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 improper towards her after the compromise.

17.

In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and Ors., (2019) 5 SCC 688, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the powers conferred under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, can be exercised by the Courts to quash the criminal proceedings featuring non-compoundable offences, when the matter arises out of matrimonial or family disputes. Moreover, it is pertinent to satisfy the Court that the said non-compoundable offences are private in nature and does not have a serious impact on the society. 18.

Furthermore, it was observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramgopal and Ors. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 INSC 568, that the extraordinary power of the High Courts under Section 482 of The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Cr.P.C. can be invoked even when such a case falls within the ambit of noncompoundable offences given that the Court must be satisfied that the nature of the offence does not impact the conscience of the society and that the compromise between the parties is voluntary and amicable. 19.

In the instant case, as stated above, the parties have reached on the compromise and amicably settled the entire disputes without any pressure. 20.

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. 109/2020 registered at Police Station Binda Pur, New Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. 21.

The petition alongwith pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J NOVEMBER 25, 2024 NA/ST Click here to check corrigendum, if any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.