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. 0633/2018 registered at Police Station - Jaitpur, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no.2 got solemnized on 30^th March, 2017 at Delhi

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 27/11/2024 at 12:16:09

¶18

according to Hindu rites and ceremonies but due to some temperamental differences between them, they started living separately since 4^th August, 2017. One child was born out of their wedlock.

¶19

Despite several efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle the differences which led to the registration of the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner.

¶20

With the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties amicably settled the matter and are living together peacefully.

¶21

The petitioners are also present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel, Mr. Bharat Singh Rawat, Advocate and Investigating Officer Insp. Satbir, Police Station Jaitpur, Delhi. The respondent no. 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by his counsel, Mr. Ankit Bidhuri, Advocate and the Investigating Officer. 6. On the query made by this Court, respondent no.2 has categorically stated that she settled the matter on her own free will and without any pressure.

¶22

It is prayed that the instant FIR be quashed on the basis of the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbai vs. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641.

¶23

Learned APP for the State submitted that there is no opposition to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶25

The instant criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on the

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 27/11/2024 at 12:16:09

¶28

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 bad towards her after the compromise. Moreover, the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 reconciled and are living together peacefully.

¶29

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. 12. 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 enjoined upon the High Courts under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be invoked even when such a case falls within the ambit of non-compoundable offences given that the Court must be satisfied that the nature of the offence does not impact the conscious of the society and that the compromise between the parties is voluntary and

¶30

This is a digitally signed order.

¶31

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 27/11/2024 at 12:16:09

¶32

amicable.

¶33

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

¶34

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the fact that they living together, the present petition is allowed. Accordingly, FIR bearing No. 0633/2018 registered at Police Station - Jaitpur, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶35

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

¶36

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J

¶37

NOVEMBER 21, 2024 gs/mk

¶38

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

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 27/11/2024 at 12:16:09

Rajender Singh & Ors. v. the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Rajender Singh & Ors. v. the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B S Negi Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Abhishek Sinha Vs Priyashree Sinha

Shubham Saxena Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi). & Anr.

Deepak Alias Gaurav Vs the State Govt of NCT Delhi

Sh. B K Das Vs State of NCT of Delhi

H. S. Oberoi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs M/S Msn Woodtech