Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time  ||  Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS  ||  Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC  ||  Delhi High Court: Elective Surgery Does Not Bar Grant of Interim Bail on Medical Grounds  ||  Delhi HC: Consensual Romance With Minor Nearing 18 May be Considered For Bail in POCSO Case  ||  Delhi HC: Not Named In FIR Doesn’t Matter If Financial Links Show Active Role in NDPS Offence  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Rape is an Affront to Womanhood and a Brutal Violation of The Right To Life  ||  Supreme Court: Single Insolvency Petition Maintainable Against Linked Corporate Entities  ||  Supreme Court: Disputes are Not Arbitrable When the Arbitration Agreement is Alleged to be Forged  ||  Supreme Court: Temple Trust Does Not Qualify as an ‘Industry’ under the Industrial Disputes Act    

Md. Aasif & Ors. Vs. State Of NCT Of Delhi & Anr. - (High Court of Delhi) (17 Apr 2023)

Cases arising out of matrimonial differences should be put to quietus, if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement

MANU/DE/2549/2023

Criminal

The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The marriage between Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent no. 2/complainant was solemnized on 5th April, 2010 as per Muslim rites and rituals. No child was born out of this wedlock. Thereafter owing to temperamental differences both parties started residing separately. Consequently, Respondent No. 2/complainant lodged the present FIR against the Petitioners, the chargesheet has not been filed in the present case.

The petitioners and the complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before this court in person and have been duly identified by the IO. Respondent No. 2 states that she has entered into the settlement voluntarily out of her own free will, without any fear, force or coercion. Since the terms and conditions of the settlement have complied, she has no objection if the present FIR and all criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

Since the dispute between the parties has been settled, continuance of proceedings in FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC would serve no useful purpose and may cause prejudice to the petitioner and be an exercise in futility. The chances of conviction would also be bleak and remote, given that the parties do not wish to pursue the present complaint on account of the settlement. It has been stated that Respondent no. 2 has already withdrawn the complaint under Section 12 of DV Act on 15.11.2022.

There is no reason to reject the settlement. It is better to put a quietus to the dispute in view of the settlement deed arrived at between the parties voluntarily without any force, fear or coercion. The Supreme Court and this Court have time and again held that, cases arising out of matrimonial differences should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement. In view of facts and circumstances of the case and to prevent abuse of the power of the Court and secure the ends of justice, the FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC and all criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. Petition disposed off.

Tags : SETTLEMENT   FIR   QUASHING OF  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved