Single judge order in a writ petition invoking inherent powers to quash an FIR under Section 498A Cr.P.C. arising from matrimonial disputes, allowed upon confirmation of amicable settlement between spouses.
FIR No.0270/2021 under Sections 498A/323/34 IPC registered at P.S. Kalyanpuri and all proceedings emanating therefrom quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~51
Through: Mr. Anil Dwivedi and Ms. Asha Dwivedi, Advs. alongwith petitioners in person.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for the State with Mr. Abhijet Kumar, Adv. and with SI Mayank Istwal, PS Kalyanpuri.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
% J U D G M E N T
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
1. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) has been preferred on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of FIR No.0270/2021 under Sections 498A/323/34 IPC registered at P.S.: Kalyanpuri and proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. In brief, as per the case of the petitioners, marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was solemnized according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 22.02.2004. Three children were born out of the wedlock. Due to matrimonial differences, petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 started living separately. On complaint of respondent No. 2, present FIR was registered on 14.06.2021.
Signature Not Verified
Page 1 of 3
W.P.(CRL) 2283/2024
Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 0.08.2024 14:55:35
3. The disputes are stated to have been orally settled between the parties and petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 are residing together for the last two years.
4. Learned ASC for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement between the parties, she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
5. Petitioners in the present case seek to invoke the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The same is to be used to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court. In which cases, the power to quash the criminal proceedings or the complaint or FIR may be used when the offender as well as victim have settled their dispute, would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case and no generalized list or categories can be prescribed. However, the Court is required to give due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence and consider the impact on the society.
6. It may also be observed that heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot be appropriately quashed despite settlement. However, distinguished from serious offences, the offences which have predominant element of civil dispute or offences involving minor incidents, where the complainant / victim also stands compensated for loss, if any, stand on a different footing, so far as exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is concerned. The High Court also is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether there is sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving the charge for the offence charged with. It may also be assessed, if in view of compromise
Signature Not Verified
Page 2 of 3
W.P.(CRL) 2283/2024
Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 0.08.2024 14:55:35
between the parties, the possibility of conviction in such a case is remote and whether continuation of proceedings would cause grave oppression and prejudice the accused.
7. Petitioners and respondent No. 2 are present in person and have been identified by SI Mayank Istwal, PS Kalyanpuri. I have interacted with the parties and they confirm that the matter has been amicably settled between them without any threat, pressure or coercion. Respondent No. 2 also states that nothing remains to be further adjudicated upon between the parties and she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances, since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose shall be served by keeping the case pending. It would be nothing but an abuse of the process of Court. The chances of conviction are bleak in view of amicable settlement between the parties. Consequently, FIR No.0270/2021 under Sections 498A/323/34 IPC registered at P.S.: Kalyanpuri and proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
A copy of this order be forwarded to learned Trial Court for information.
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J
AUGUST 7, 2024
p
Signature Not Verified
Page 3 of 3
W.P.(CRL) 2283/2024
Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 0.08.2024 14:55:35
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash the FIR and criminal proceedings in view of an amicable settlement between the parties.
Whether continuation of criminal proceedings would cause grave oppression or prejudice the accused given the settlement.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sanjeev Bhati
State of NCT of Delhi
Anoop Kumar Mandiratta
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
