—
$~53
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 7026/2023
PREET SINGH ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Vikas Nagwan, Mr. Neeraj
Chauhan, Advs.
versus
STATE OF NCT DELHI ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP with SI
Anjali PS Begampur
Mr. Raman Kumar, Adv. for R2 with
R2 in person.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
ORDER
% 26.09.2023
CRL.M.A. 26216/2023 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 7026/2023
3. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking
quashing of FIR No. 378/2022 under Sections 323/376/377/34 IPC
(chargesheet filed under Sections 323/376/377/506/34 IPC) registered at
P.S. Begampur, District North-West, Delhi and all consequential
proceedings emanating therefrom on the ground that the parties have arrived
at a settlement.
4. Issue notice. The learned APP for the State accepts notice. He submits
that since the FIR is an outcome of a matrimonial dispute and the parties
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/09/2023 at 21:20:41
have arrived at a settlement, the State has no objection in case the FIR in
question is quashed.
5. He further submits that since the criminal law has been put into
motion by making serious allegations and lot of time of the investigating
agency as well as judicial time has been wasted, the parties should be put to
some terms.
6. The petitioner no. 1 (husband) and other petitioners, who are close
relatives of petitioner no. 1, as well as, respondent no. 2 are present in Court
and they have been identified by their respective counsels and by SI Anjali
PS Begampur.
7. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the petitioner
no. 1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnized on 28.06.2009 according to
Hindu Rites and Customs. Out of the said wedlock one male child namely
Aarav was born on 27.10.2010.
8. On account of temperamental issues, certain disputes arose between
the parties and they started living separately w.e.f. March, 2010. The
dispute between the parties also led to the registration of present FIR at the
instance of the respondent no. 2.
9. During the pendency of the proceedings the parties were referred to
the Counselling Cell attached to the Court of Principal Judge North District,
Family Court, Delhi where they arrived at a settlement, terms whereof were
reduced in writing in the form of settlement report dated 21.08.2023, copy of
which is annexed as Annexure P-2 to the present petition.
10. In terms of the said settlement, the parties decided to settle all their
disputes and agreed to live together. It is also a term of the settlement that
the petitioner no. 1 will bear all expenses including educational, household,
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/09/2023 at 21:20:41
medical, electric maintenance besides payment of Rs.5,000/- to the
respondent no. 2 for the personal maintenance of the respondent no. 2 and
the minor child. The parties have also agreed to cooperate with each other
for quashing of aforesaid FIR.
11. On a query put by this Court, the respondent no.2, who is present in
court, states that she has no objection in case the FIR is quashed.
12. The offences alleged in the FIR are also under Sections 376 and 377
IPC. A Co-ordinate Bench of this court in ‘Rifakat Ali Ors Vs. State
Anr.’ [CRL.M.C. No. 599/2021, decided on 26.02.2021] after referring to
three decisions of the Supreme Court, has taken a view that an offence under
Section 377 IPC, is though a heinous offence, but where such an offence is
invoked in a matrimonial dispute and where the parties have decided to part
ways and move ahead in their lives without acrimony against each other,
power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised even for an offence under
Section 377 IPC on the ground that the dispute is private in nature. The
material part of the said decision reads as under:-
“….10. A perusal of the three judgments which shows that the
Supreme Court has consistently held that the power under
Section 482 CrPC should not be used for quashing heinous and
serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder,
rape, dacoity etc. since these offences are not private in nature
and have a serious impact in society. An offence under Section
377 IPC is a heinous offence and points to the mental depravity
of the accused and hence ought not to be quashed by the High
Court on the basis of compromise by exercising its jurisdiction
under Section 482 CrPC.
11. The present case arises out of matrimonial dispute and the
allegation has been made by the wife against the husband. The
parties have decided to part ways and get ahead in their lives
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/09/2023 at 21:20:42
without having any acrimony against each other. In the facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to exercise its
powers under Section 482 CrPC even for an offence under
Section 377 IPC on the ground that the dispute is private in
nature.
12. The learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on
orders of this Court in CRL.M.C.830/2019 titled as Dinesh
Kumar Ors. v. State Anr., CRL.M.C.1613/2019 titled as
Anmol Katyal Ors. v. State (NCT of Delhi) Anr., CRL.M.C.
5216/2018 titled as Gajender Singh Ors. v. State (NCT of
Delhi) Ors. and CRL.M.C. 4117/2018 titled as Joginder Singh
Bote Ors. v. NCT of Delhi Anr. In all these cases wife has
levelled allegation of the husband committing an offence under
Section 377 IPC. This Court has exercised its jurisdiction under
Section 482 CrPC and has quashed the FIRs on the basis of the
compromise entered into between the husband and wife.
13. It is made clear that this Court is exercising its powers under
Section 482 CrPC to quash an offence of Section 377 IPC on the
ground that the parties have compromised the matter with each
other only because it arises out of a matrimonial dispute, the
allegation has been levelled by wife against her husband of
committing an offence under Section 377 IPC and the parties
have decided to move ahead in life.”…
13. Needless to say that since the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 are
husband and wife and they have decided to live together, the same analogy
will apply to the offence under Section 376 IPC as well as Section 377 IPC
in the present case.
14. In view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement, no
useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings, rather the same
would create further acrimony between them.
15. It is, thus, in the interest of justice that the present FIR and all the
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/09/2023 at 21:20:42
other proceedings emanating therefrom, be quashed.
16. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the FIR No. 378/2022 under
Sections 323/376/37734 IPC (chargesheet filed under Sections
323/376/377/506/34 IPC) registered at P.S. Begampur, District North-West,
Delhi and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is quashed.
17. In the present case, since the State machinery has been put into
motion and considerable time and resources of the investigating agency have
been spent in the investigation of the matter and the judicial time has also
been wasted. However, regard being had to humble background of the
petitioners, no cost is being imposed on them but they are being directed to
contribute towards some social cause.
18. Accordingly, each petitioner and the respondent no.2 is directed to
plant 20 trees in their locality, which they shall look after with all proper
care. The trees shall be planted near their residence in consultation with the
I.O. concerned, who shall identify and inform about the place for planting
the same in consultation with the concerned Horticulture Department of the
MCD.
19. The needful shall be done within a period of 4 weeks from today and
status report be filed in this regard within 6 weeks from today.
20. The petitions stand disposed off, in the above terms.
21. List for compliance on 10.11.2023.
22. Order be uploaded on the website of this court.
VIKAS MAHAJAN, J
SEPTEMBER 26, 2023/N.S. ASWAL
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/09/2023 at 21:20:42