Court’s Decision
The Delhi High Court, in a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, quashed FIR No. 0228/2021 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC. The Court allowed the petition after observing that the matrimonial dispute between the parties had been amicably resolved through a Settlement Deed. Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court held:
“In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the fact that parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR… In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed.”
Facts
- The marriage between the petitioner and the second respondent was solemnized on 30.06.2001, and they had three children.
- Due to temperamental differences, the couple started living separately under the same roof.
- The second respondent lodged a complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act (DV Act) bearing No. 1018/2020 and also filed the FIR No. 0228/2021 at P.S. Sarai Rohilla under Sections 498A/406/509/323/34 IPC.
- Subsequently, the parties executed a Settlement Deed/MoU on 24.03.2025, agreeing to live together again at the matrimonial home and to withdraw all pending cases and complaints.
Issues
- Whether the FIR registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC should be quashed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 in light of the mutual settlement and reconciliation between the parties.
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The petitioners submitted that all matrimonial disputes had been resolved through mutual consent and that both parties were now cohabiting peacefully.
- They contended that the continuation of criminal proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose since the complainant had no objection to quashing the FIR.
- They relied on the Settlement Deed dated 24.03.2025, which was duly signed by both parties and placed on record.
Respondent’s Arguments
- The second respondent appeared in person and confirmed the settlement before the Joint Registrar as well as the High Court.
- She affirmed that the agreement was voluntary and without any coercion, and that she had resumed cohabitation with the petitioner.
- She unequivocally stated that she had no objection to the FIR being quashed and undertook not to initiate any further proceedings related to the same facts.
Analysis of the Law
- The Court examined the powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which permits quashing of criminal proceedings based on settlement, especially in matrimonial matters.
- The principle guiding such powers is to prevent abuse of the process of law and to secure the ends of justice.
Precedent Analysis
The Court relied upon the Supreme Court’s decision in:
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, where it was held:
“The High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings… if the answer to the above question is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.”
This case was used to underline the Court’s discretion to quash FIRs involving matrimonial disputes when the parties have reached a genuine compromise.
Court’s Reasoning
- The Court noted that both parties had made voluntary statements confirming the authenticity of the Settlement Deed.
- It took into account that the respondent had agreed to reside with the petitioner and had no objections to quashing the FIR and charge sheet.
- The Court also recorded the fact that the settlement was not merely formal but had been followed by actual resumption of cohabitation.
Accordingly, the Court concluded that:
“No useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR… In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed.”
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 0228/2021, dated 30.04.2021, registered at P.S. Sarai Rohilla under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC along with the charge sheet and all consequential proceedings. All pending applications were also disposed of.
Implications
- The judgment reinforces the judiciary’s willingness to promote reconciliation and settlement in matrimonial disputes rather than prolonging criminal proceedings.
- It also affirms the discretionary powers of the High Court under Section 528 BNSS to quash FIRs in appropriate cases where the dispute has been amicably resolved.
- The case stands as a reminder that criminal law should not be used vindictively when parties have moved past their differences and restored peace.