- In Raja Berwa& Ors v. State & Anr 2022, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that if the Court is pleased that the parties have resolved the disputes amicably, without undue pressure, even in non-compoundable offenses on matrimonial disputes, then FIRs or subsequent criminal proceedings concerning the crimes can be quashed to secure the ends of justice. Therefore, the FIR under Section 498A, 406, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was quashed by the Court.
- In this case, the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 married in 2003, but owing to temperamental disagreements, they have been living separately since 2005. A girl child was born out of wedlock. Despite several attempts at reconciliation, neither party could resolve their issues. The wife filed an FIR against all of the petitioners through the CAW Cell. However, due to the intervention of family members, both parties subsequently reached an agreement before the Mediation Centre.
- The parties filed for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, as per the settlement terms. Divorce was granted to the parties under Section 13B (1) on August 31, 2021. Furthermore, under Section 13B (2) of the HMA, a petition was filed by mutual consent to dissolve the marriage. Moreover, the wife claimed to have settled all her claims with the husband and other family members for a sum of Rs. 15,50,000 in reverence of her dowry articles, stridhan, etc., and future maintenance and permanent alimony for Rs. 10,00,000, with the remaining Rs. 5,50,000 agreed to be paid at the time of the FIR's quashing. It was consequently requested that the FIR be dismissed on the grounds of the Memorandum of Understanding and the Supreme Court's decision in Gian Singh vs. the State of Punjab.
- Section 34 of the IPC provides joint culpability when multiple people have a common intention.
- Section 406 of the IPC outlines the punishment for criminal breach of trust.
- Section 498A of the IPC punishes a woman's husband or any relative of the husband who subjected her to abuse.
- In Gian Singh vs. the State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, the petitioner sought a quashing of the FIR under Section 482, CrPC on the grounds of compounding the offense. The HC had rejected that petition under Section 482 CrPC. As a result, another petition was filed before the Supreme Court.
- In another relevant case, B.S. Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Ors. (2003) 4 SCC 675, the Hon'ble SC held that if quashing of FIR becomes essential for safeguarding the ends of justice, Section 320 CrPC would not be a bar to exercise the authority quashing under Section 482 CrPC.
- After hearing both parties and referring to the aforementioned cases, the Hon'ble Court concluded that the proceeding was private in nature and did not have a significant influence on society as both parties came to an agreement. Furthermore, it stated that the parties had achieved a consensus and had peacefully resolved all the problems without any pressure.
- Therefore, the Hon'ble HC allowed the petition.
"Loved reading this piece by Sharmishta?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
