Karnataka HC: Courts Should Ensure That Legal Procedures Are Not Abused in Order to Reduce Burden  ||  Utt. HC: Joining in Service Cannot Be Denied to Woman on The Ground of Her Pregnancy  ||  Kar. HC: Can’t Stretch Protection u/a 21 to Those Posing Threat to Nation’s Sovereignty & Integrity  ||  Delhi High Court: Can’t Stop Student From Entering Exam Hall Once Admit Card Issued  ||  Supreme Court Asks Medical Colleges Either to Pay Stipend or Not Have Internship  ||  Calcutta HC: No Penal Proceedings Attracted if Bona-Fide Mistake Occurs in Court Reporting  ||  Bombay HC: Can’t Entertain Application Increasing Valuation of Suit if Pecuniary Jurisdiction Lost  ||  Bom. HC: Information of Previous Bail Applications And Orders to Be Give in All Bail Applications  ||  Cal. HC: Clause in GCC Specifying App. of Officers For Arbitration Violative of S. 12(5) of A&C Act  ||  Cal HC: High Court Lacks Jurisd. When Application u/s 9A of A&C Act Filed Before Commercial Court    

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



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.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved