SANDEEP SHARMA & ORS.  Vs THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) OF DELHI & ANR. -Judgment by Delhi High Court

$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 7096/2022
SANDEEP SHARMA & ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Deepak Parashar and Mr. Prakhar
Singh, Advocates with petitioners in person.
versus

THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) OF DELHI & ANR…… Respondents
Through: Mr.Satinder Singh Bawa, APP for the State
SI Ashutosh Mishra, PS Bhajanpura, Delhi.
Mr.Ajay Gautam, adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person.

% Date of Decision: 17.01.2023

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

J U D G M E N T

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed seeking quashing of FIR No. 0245/2017 registered at PS Bhajanpura. Initially the FIR was lodged under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC. However, later Section 377 IPC was added at the statement of the respondent No.2/complainant after filing of the charge-sheet. However, parties were referred to mediation and a settlement took place between them at Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi on 02.03.2022. The settlement arrived at between the parties is as under:
�The parties have entered into a settlement in respect of all the above stated cases except section 377 IPC in case FIR no. 245/2017, PS Bhajanpura, as section 377 IPC is non-compoundable.

Mediation process explained to the parties. Separate and joint sessions held with the parties. Now, parties have voluntarily and amicably arrived at a settlement qua their above stated cases except section 377 IPC in case FIR no. 245/17, stated above, on the following terms and conditions: –

1. It is agreed between the parties that they shall get their marriage dissolved by mutual consent in accordance with law as provided u/s 13 (B) of HM Act.
2. It is agreed between the parties that the husband shall pay a total sum of Rs.15,50,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) to the wife towards full and final settlement of all her claims arising out of the marriage including istridhan, permanent alimony, maintenance (present, past & future).
3. It is agreed between the parties that the custody of baby Disha Sharma shall remain with the wife and the husband shall not have custody rights of baby Disha Sharma and shall not have visitation rights to meet with baby Disha Sharma.
4. It is agreed between the parties that the petition for first motion shall be filed by the parties within one week from today and the second motion petition shall be filed by the parties within one month of expiry of statutory period of six months as per law or on getting the statutory period waived off as per law.
5. It is agreed between the parties that the payment of the settled amount of Rs. 15,50,000/- shall be made by the husband to the wife in the following manner: –
i) Rs.4,00,000/- (Rs. Four Lakhs only) by way of DD in the name of the wife at the time of recording statement of the parties in first motion petition for divorce by mutual consent.
ii) Rs.4,50,000/- (Rs. Four Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) by way of DD before the court concerned at the time of recording statement of the parties in second motion petition for divorce by mutual consent.
iii) Rs.7,00,000/- (Rs. Seven Lakhs only) by way of DD before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi at the time of quashing of FIR bearing no. 245/2017, PS Bhajanpura, in respect of sections 323/498A/406/34 IPC. It is agreed between the parties that the husband and other respondents shall file petition for quashing of the said FIR before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi within one month of obtaining final decree of divorce by mutual consent and the wife shall cooperate with all the respondents in quashing in every manner.
6. It is agreed between the parties there is one car Wagon R bearing registration no. DL8CAL2676, which is in possession of the husband. It is agreed between the parties that the husband shall get the said car transferred in the name of the wife on or before recording statement of the parties in first motion petition for divorce by mutual consent and shall hand over the possession of the said car to the wife before the court concerned at the time of recording statement of the parties in second motion petition for divorce by mutual consent.
7. It is agreed between the parties that the settlement is only between the husband and wife and the minor child would be free to have recourse to the provisions of law for seeking appropriate relief from the court in relation to the aspect of maintenance, education and upbringing in terms of the pronouncement of the judgment by Hon�ble High Court in case titled as �Rakesh Jain & Ors. V/s. Sarita Gupta, Cr. Misc. No. 2935/2019�.
8. It is agreed between the parties that the wife shall withdraw her present complaint w/s. 12 of DV Act as well as execution petition from the court concerned after recording statement of the parties in first motion petition but before recording statement of the parties in second motion petition for divorce by mutual consent.
9. It is agreed between the parties that they shall not be left with any matrimonial rights towards each other & shall not be left with any right, title or interest in the movable or immovable properties of each other and their family members.
10. It is agreed between the parties that they shall not interfere in each others� personal life or in the life of any of their family members & shall not litigate qua the marriage in future.
11. It is agreed between the parties that in case of breach! violation/willful/deliberate disobedience, the party breaching the terms shall be liable for contempt proceedings and the party aggrieved shall be entitled for status quo-ante in every possible way.
12. It is agreed between the parties that the defaulting party would return all the benefits/advantages/privileges that have enured in its favour and both the parties would be restored to the position that was before they had arrived at such a settlement agreement.
13. It is agreed between the parties that the terms have been settled between the parties of their own free will, volition and consent and without there being any undue pressure, coercion, influence, misrepresentation or mistake (both of law and fact), in any form, whatsoever and the settlement agreement has correctly recorded the said agreed terms and the contents of the settlement have been read over to the parties in vernacular.�
2. The mediation center has rightly not recorded the settlement under Section 377 IPC. However, besides that the parties have entered into a settlement with regard to all other offences. The marriage between the parties has also been dissolved under Section 13-B (2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by way of mutual consent vide decree and judgement dated 14.10.2022 by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. Thereafter, the parties have also reached on a separate MOU dated 14.11.2022 whereby the parties have reiterated their commitment to be bound by the terms of mediation settlement dated 02.03.2022. The same has been reproduced as under:
�1. That the First Party and Second Party No. 1 to 6 agree to abide by the terms of the mediation settlement dated 02.03.2022.
2.That the First Party has received the amount of Rs. 8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) from the Second Party No. 1 to 6 as per the terms of settlement dated 02.03.2022 and the balance amount of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Only) shall be paid by the Second Party No. 1 to 6 to the First Party at the time her statement before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in quashing proceedings with respect to FIR No. 245 of 2017 PS Bhajan Pura.
3. That the First Party has now agreed to settle all the matters including the section 377 IPC in case FIR no. 245/2017 PS Bhajan Pura and the First Party has no objection that the FIR No. 245 of 2017 PS Bhajan Pura u/s 323/498A/406 IPC and 377/34 IPC is quashed qua all the Second Party No. 1 to 6.
4. That it has also been agreed between the First Party and Second Party No. 1 to 6 that the terms of mediation settlement agreement dated 02.03.2022 and this MOU have been made keeping in view the wellbeing of the minor child Ms. Disha Sharma and the terms of the mediation settlement or this MOU shall not in any manner restrict the right of minor child to take recourse of the provisions of law for seeking appropriate relief against either deponent or the Respondent No. 2 through Hon’ble Court towards her maintenance, education or up brining etc
That now there remains no dispute/grievances between the parties and their family members, and all the parties have agreed that they will not file any case of any nature against each other regarding the marriage and other incidental/ancillary issues.
6. That in future, the parties would not interfere in the life of one another or their respective family members.
7. That the parties have arrived at this amicable settlement out of their own will and accord without any undue influence, pressure, coercion, misrepresentation.�
3. The petitioners and the complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before this court in person and have been duly identified by the IO. The respondent no. 2 has stated that in pursuance of the settlement, a demand draft no. 130231 dated 21.12.2022 in the sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs only) drawn on Canara Bank, DTC Nandnagari Branch, New Delhi- 110093 has been handed over to her today in the court. She has stated that he has entered into the settlement at her own free will without any fear, force or coercion. Both the parties have stated that the child born out of the wedlock shall remain with the respondent No. 2/mother. Both the parties have stated that they have not entered into any settlement regarding the rights and interest of the minor child namely Disha Sharma and she shall be entitled to pursue the same in accordance with law. Respondent No.2 has stated that the petitioners have complied with the terms and conditions of the settlement and therefore, she has no objection if the present FIR and all criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
4. The dispute between the parties has been settled and continuance of FIR No. 0245/2017 would serve no useful purpose and may cause prejudice to the petitioner and be an exercise in futility. The chances of conviction would also be bleak and remote, given that the parties do not wish to pursue the present complaint on account of the settlement. I do not see any reason to reject the settlement. It is better to put a quietus to the dispute in view of the settlement deed arrived at between the parties voluntarily without any force, fear and coercion. The Supreme Court and this Court have time and again held that cases arising out of matrimonial differences should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement. (Refer B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675; K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa, (2013) 5 SCC 226; Yashpal Chaudhrani and Others vs. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) and Another, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8179).
5. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the submissions of respondent No. 2 the case FIR No. 0245/2017 registered at PS Bhajanpura under Sections 498A/406/34/377 IPC and all criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
6. It is pertinent to mention here that both the parties have stated that the child born out of the wedlock namely Disha Sharma will be free to pursue her legal rights in accordance with the law. The parties have entered into a settlement only with regard to their rights, titles or interests and the rights of the child to pursue her legal remedies as per law is left open.
7. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of.

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J
JANUARY 17, 2023
rb

Neutral Citation Number 2023/DHC/000830

CRL.M.C. 7096/2022 Page 7 of 7