This order quashed an FIR under 498A/406/34 IPC after a settlement and divorce between the parties. The petitioners paid maintenance, and the wife waived objection to quashing. The minor child's future rights remain unaffected.
Quashing of FIR No. 545/2019 and all consequential proceedings.
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.
$~37
SURAJ RANA & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Vijay Dahiya, Adv. with petitioners in person.
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with SI Rooma Yadav, P.S. Paschim Vihar (West).
Ms. Tanvi Munjal & Mr. Hitesh Singh, Advs. for R-2 with R-2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
O R D E R
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:45:09
settlement deed, petitioner no.1 has agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- to the respondent no.2/wife towards full and final settlement of all her claims including istridhan , permanent alimony and maintenance - present, past and future (AnnexureP-2). It is submitted that the aforesaid amount has already been paid to respondent no.2, who acknowledges the receipt of the same.
“61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:45:09
be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.”
AMIT SHARMA, J
JANUARY 29, 2024 / nk
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2024 at 12:45:09
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings under Section 498A/406/34 IPC should be quashed in view of the post-complaint settlement and divorce decree between the parties.
Whether the interests of justice require the termination of criminal proceedings after a full and final financial settlement and divorce.
Whether the quashing of the FIR against the husband impinges upon the rights of the minor child for maintenance and inheritance.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabApplied¶21
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Suraj Rana
Unnamed Petitioner No.2 (Mother-in-law)
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Unnamed Respondent No.2 (Wife)
Amit Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
