1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners, namely, for quashing of FIR No.352/2013 dated 17.09.2013, under Sections 498A/406 IPC registered at Police Station Amar Colony on the basis of the report of the Counseling Cell, in view of the settlement arrived at between petitioner no.1 and respondent No.2, namely, Smt.Taruna @ Palak on 13.10.2014.

2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2, present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question by her counsel.

3. The factual matrix of the present case is that the marriage between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 was solemnized on 16.10.2011. After the marriage, the complainant came to know that her husband is a habitual drinker and after consuming the same he used to beat up the complainant mercilessly. The parents-in-law of the complainant also used to use filthy language towards her and her family members. When the complainant was six months pregnant, her husband used to beat her with legs and blows. On 14.06.2013, the daughter of the complainant fell ill and when she asked the petitioner no.1 to take her to the doctor, he threatened her and gave her beatings. The petitioner no.1 even threw the complainant out the matrimonial home.

The respondent no.2/complainant lodged a complaint which resulted into the registration of the FIR in question against the petitioners. After the completion of the investigation, a charge sheet under Section 406 r/w 498-A IPC was filed. During the pendency of the case, the parties settled their dispute on 13.10.2014 in the Counselling Cell, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

4. Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. As per the settlement, it has been agreed that the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 shall take divorce by way of mutual consent. It is also agreed that the petitioner no.1 shall pay to the respondent no.2 a sum of Rs. 6 Lacs and dowry articles as per the list enclosed with the counseling report. It is also agreed that the above payment shall be towards full and final settlement (against stridhan and dowry, maintenance towards past, present and future qua this marriage and nothing remain due qua this marriage) in three installments. It is agreed that the schedule of payment shall be as enunciated in the terms of the settlement. It is also agreed that the petitioner shall prepare a FD of Rs. 6 Lacs in the name of the minor child at the time of quashing of the FIR in question. It is agreed that the first motion petition shall be filed on or before 15.12.2014 and second motion petition shall be filed soon after the completion of the period of 6 months of the order under Section 13 B(1) H.M.A. It is also agreed that the child is living in the custody of respondent no.2 and shall remain with her. It is also agreed that the petitioner no.1 shall not have any visitation rights towards the child. It is also agreed that the respondent no.2 shall withdraw the divorce case pending in the concerned Family Court, Tis Hazari Courts, petitions under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Section 12 of the D.V. Act and the proceedings emanating from the FIR in question. Respondent No.2 affirmed the contents of the aforesaid settlement and of her affidavit dated 22.12.2015 supporting this petition. In the affidavit, the respondent no.2 has stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. All the disputes and differences have been resolved through mutual consent. Now no dispute with petitioners survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end. Statement of the respondent No.2 has been recorded in this regard in which she stated that she has entered into a compromise with the petitioners and has settled all the disputes with them. She further stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

5. 10 SCC 303 Apex Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, by observing as under:-

"61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would 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."

6. The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in a recent judgment in (2014) 6 SCC

466. The relevant observations of the Apex Court in are as under:-

"29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings: 29.1 Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution. 29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:

(i) ends of justice, or

(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. 29.3. Such a power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for the offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender.

29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.

7. The inherent powers of the High Court ought to be exercised to prevent the abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice. The respondent no.2 agrees to the quashing of the FIR in question without any threat or coercion or undue influence and has stated that the matter has been settled out of her own free will. As the matter has been settled and compromised amicably, so, there would be an extraordinary delay in the process of law if the legal proceedings between the parties are carried on. So, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case to invoke the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent the abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice.

8. The incorporation of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is meant to deal with the situation in the absence of express provision of law to secure the ends of justice such as, where the process is abused or misused; where the ends of justice cannot be secured; where the process of law is used for the unjust or unlawful object; to avoid the causing of harassment to any person by using the provision of Cr.P.C. or to avoid the delay of the legal process in the delivery of justice. Whereas, the inherent power is not to be exercised to circumvent the express provisions of law.

9. It is settled law that the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be used sparingly. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra through . SC/0842/2014 and in the case of MANU/SC/0808/2009 has observed that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. must be exercised sparingly, carefully and with great caution. Only when the Court comes to the conclusion that there would be manifest injustice or there would be abuse of the process of the Court if such power is not exercised, Court would quash the proceedings.

10. It is a well settled law that where the High Court is convinced that the offences are entirely personal in nature and therefore do not affect public peace or tranquillity and where it feels that quashing of such proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and would secure ends of justice, it should not hesitate to quash them. In such cases, pursuing prosecution would be waste of time and energy. Non-compoundable offences are basically an obstruction in entering into compromise. In certain cases, the main offence is compoundable but the connected offences are not. In the case of nd others v. State of Haryana and another 2003 (4) SCC 675 the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that even though the provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not apply to such offences which are not compoundable, it did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Hon'ble Apex Court laid down that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. In the nutshell, the Hon'ble Apex Court justified the exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings to secure the ends of justice in view of the special facts and circumstances of the case, even where the offences were non- compoundable.

Tags:

#Best Divorce Lawyer in Tis Hazari Court, # Divorce Lawyer in Tis Hazari Court, #Top Divorce Lawyer in Tis Hazari Court, #Mtual Divorce Lawyer in Tis Hazari Court