After Divorce And Full ₹13.5 Lakh Settlement, Delhi HC Quashes Dowry-Cruelty FIR Against Husband And In-Laws

In brief

The question

Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings for non-compoundable matrimonial offences after the parties settled their disputes

The court held

The Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No. 519/2022, registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, at P.S. Mehrauli, together with all consequential proceedings.

It also directed

The pending application was also disposed of.

01Facts

The petitioners sought quashing under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, of FIR No. 519/2022, registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, on the complaint of petitioner No. 1’s former wife, respondent No. 2

p. 1

The parties had entered into a settlement covering, among other matters, financial claims, mutual divorce, and quashing of the FIR; the marriage was subsequently dissolved by mutual-consent decree, and respondent No. 2 withdrew her Domestic Violence Act complaint

pp. 2–5

Respondent No. 2 filed an affidavit of no objection, confirmed her voluntary settlement, and stated that she had received the full settlement amount of ₹13,50,000

p. 6

02Issues

i.Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash the FIR and consequential proceedings for non-compoundable matrimonial offences after the parties settled their disputes

p. 1, 6

ii.Whether the settlement was sufficient, in the circumstances, to warrant quashing where respondent No. 2 had no objection and the related matrimonial proceedings had been resolved

pp. 5–6

03Law Applied

Section 528 of the BNSS preserves the High Court’s inherent power to make orders necessary to secure the ends of justice.

The Court relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, in considering whether criminal proceedings arising from a matrimonial dispute could be quashed following settlement, notwithstanding that an offence was non-compoundable.

p. 6

The judgment does not set out or elaborate the governing test from Gian Singh.

Provisions in the judgment · 5 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 406 Section 34

Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 Section 4

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the parties had settled their matrimonial disputes, their marriage had been dissolved, and the Domestic Violence Act complaint had been withdrawn.

pp. 5–6

Respondent No. 2 confirmed that the settlement was voluntary, that she had received the entire agreed amount, and that she had no objection to quashing.

p. 6

Applying the principle in Gian Singh, the Court found no impediment to allowing the petition despite the non-compoundable nature of an offence in the FIR.

p. 6