W.P.(CRL)/3065/2015 of SUSHIL KHOSLA Vs THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(CRL) 3065/2015SUSHIL KHOSLA..... Petitioner

ThroughMr.Rajiv Bajaj, Adv.

versus

THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR

..... RespondentsThroughMs.Richa Kapoor, ASC with

Mr.Rohit Kaul & Mr.Ashish Negi,Advs.W/SI Anju Tyagi PS Hari Nagar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMARO R R%22.12.2015

Crl.M.A No.18805/2015

Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

WP.Crl. 3065/2015

The petitioners are seeking quashing of FIR No. 768/2015 (PS. HariNagar) instituted for offences under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC on thestrength of settlement having been arrived at with the complainant(respondent no.2).

The petitioner no. 1 is the husband of respondent no. 2 and the otherpetitioners are the related to petitioner no. 1.

The marriage between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 wassolemnized on 25.04.2008 as per Hindu religious rites and ceremonies atDelhi and out of said wedlock, male child was born. However, disputes

arosebetweenthepetitionersandrespondentno.2onaccountoftemperamental differences.

The respondent no. 2 filed complaint at CAW Cell under Section 12of the DV Act which subsequently led to the registration of the subject FIRagainst petitioners under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC.

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts,Delhi when petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 decided to amicably resolvetheir disputes.The said settlement was recorded in the mediationproceedings on 15.09.2015. In view of the settlement arrived at between theparties, petitioners and respondent no. 2 have started living together.The parties are present in the Court and they testify to the avermentsmade in the petition.

Considering the fact that the grievance of the respondent no.2 hasbeen completely redressed and petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 havenow started residing together, it would only be in the fitness of things thatthe subject FIR be quashed.

In the case of Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. vs. Babita Raghuvanshi& Anr. (2013) 4 SCC 58, wherein the Supreme Court in respect of thematrimonial disputes has specifically held as follows:-

“15. In our view, it is the duty of the courts to encouragegenuinesettlementsofmatrimonialdisputes,particularly,whenthesameareonconsiderableincrease. Even if the offences are non-compoundable, ifthey relate to matrimonial disputes and the Court issatisfied that the parties have settled the same amicably

and without any pressure, we hold that for the purpose ofsecuring ends of justice, Section 320 of the Code wouldnot be bar to the exercise of power of quashing of FIR,complaint or the subsequent criminal proceedings.

16. There has been an outburst of matrimonial disputesin recent times. They institution of marriage occupies animportant place and it has an important role to play inthe society. Therefore, every effort should be made in theinterest of the individuals in order to enable them tosettle down in life and live peacefully. If the partiesponder over their defaults and terminate their disputesamicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it outin court of law, in order to do complete justice in thematrimonial matters, the courts should be less hesitant inexercising their extraordinary jurisdiction. It is trite tostate that the power under Section 482 should beexercised sparingly and with circumspection only whenthe Court is convinced, on the basis of material onrecord, that allowing the proceedings to continue wouldbe an abuse of process of court or that the ends of justicerequire that the proceedings ought to be quashed….”

Keeping in mind the facts of this case and the settlement between theparties, allowing the criminal proceeding to be continued any further wouldnot be in accord with the guiding factor namely securing the ends of justice.

For the reasons afore-recorded FIR No. 768/2015 (PS. Hari Nagar)and all the emanating proceedings thereof are quashed.

The petition is disposed of in terms of the above.

DECEMBER 22, 2015/ab

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J