Delhi High Court
Priyash Bhargava & Ors. vs State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. on 21 April, 2023
Neutral Citation Number :2023:DHC:2864
$~32
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2569/2022
PRIYASH BHARGAVA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Ms. Charu Bahrdwaj, Advocate with
P-1 and 2.
P-3 and P-4 appeared through V/c.
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Raghuvender Verma, APP for
State and SI Arun, PS Model Town.
% Date of Decision: 21.04.2023.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
JUDGMENT
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J. (Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under section 482 CrPC seeking
quashing of case FIR No.130/2017 registered under section
498A/406/307/313/377/34 IPC and section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act,
1961.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the parties got married on
04.06.2013 according to Hindu rights and ceremonies. That due to conflicts
and difference in attitude Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.2 could not
adjust together and are thereby living separately since march 2017.
Thereafter, Respondent No.2 got the above-mentioned FIR registered
against all the petitioners. There is no child born out of this wedlock.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:28.04.2023
12:54:53
Neutral Citation Number :2023:DHC:2864
3. However it is submitted that now the parties have reached on a
settlement on the following terms and conditions
"A. It is agreed between the parties, that they would
file a mutual divorce petition before the Family Court
within two week of signing of the present MOU and shall
appear before the court to make their statement before the
Family Court.
B. That the SECOND PARTY undertakes that his
mother i.e., Mrs. Meera Bhargava will withdraw the cases,
filed under Section 12 of Protection from Women from
Domestic Violence Act-2005 pending in IN THE COURT
OF MS. UPASANA SATIJA 761-MM/MAHIL, NORTH
DISTRICT, Rohini Court Complex, New Delhi 110085 And
Case filed Under 156 (3) Cr.P.C. pending in the court of
Mr. Mayank Goel 528-MM, North District, Rohini court
complex, New Delhi 110085 and Complaint under Senior
Citizen Act filed before District Magistrate Alipur, on or
before presentation of 2nd motion petition.
C. That the SECOND PARTY will also withdraw
application filed under section 340 Cr.P.C. pending IN THE
COURT OF MR. MANU RAI SETHI PRINCIPAL JUDGE,
NORTH DISTRICT, Rohini court complex, New Delhi
110085, on or before presentation of second motion
petition.
D. That the FIRST PARTY had filed cases, under
section 12 of Protection from Women from Domestic
Violence Act-2005 in Rohini District Court, vide Filling No.
3682/2017 Filling Date 13/04/2017 and 125 Cr.P.C. in
Rohini District court, vide Filling No. 186/2017 Filling
Date 03/04/2017, Both the cases are dismissedfor non-
prosecution. The FIRST PARTY is under obligation to
withdraw divorce petition No. 865/ 2020 pending before
family court, Karkardooma on or before the presentation of
second motion divorce petition.
E. That it has also been agreed that FIRST PARTY
undertakes to sign all affidavit, application or petition for
quashing of the FIR after recording statements of SECOND
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:28.04.2023
12:54:53
Neutral Citation Number :2023:DHC:2864
motion.
F. That is has also been agreed that after recording
of statements of parties in the SECOND motion and after
passing of decree of divorce by mutual consent, the
SECOND PARTY shall file the quashing petition before
Hon'ble Delhi High Court for quashing of the FIR bearing
No. 130/17, dated 04/04/2017 P.S. Model Town, as per the
law, which is pending in the court of Mr. Rakesh Kumar III,
Additional Session Judge, North District, Rohini Court
Complex, New Delhi 110085, and the FIRST PARTY
undertakes to co-operate in the process of quashing of the
said FIR, as per the law, and make necessary statement or
affidavit and also appear before Hon'ble High Court.
G. The parties shall withdraw all proceedings/
cases/ complaints filed by them against each other or their
family members, which they have or have not appraised to
each other, on or before filing of second motion petition.
Both parties need to share the document showing the
closure of proceeding / case / complaint to the other PARTY
on or before presentation of 2nd motion petition.
H. The parties shall not retrograde to comply with
the terms of the present MOU and if any PARTY does so,
the other PARTY shall have all rights to proceed in the
Court of Law as per remedy available to him/her, not
limited to withdrawing or challenging the divorce from/in
the court of law.
I. The either PARTY shall not raise any claim or
right over the properties (immovable or movable) of the
other PARTY or his/her parents and relatives in future
under any enactment prevailing or any enactment made in
future, under any prevailing or future circumstances.
J. The either PARTY shall not file any other
civil/criminal cases or other complaints relating to
matrimonial dispute or arising out of this marriage against
the other PARTY or his family members within the
jurisdiction in India, or abroad.
K. Apart from above complaints, if either PARTY
has initiated any complaint or a case before any
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:28.04.2023
12:54:53
Neutral Citation Number :2023:DHC:2864
authority/commission/tribunal against other PARTY or
his/her family members in Delhi or any part of India without
the knowledge or in knowledge of other PARTY then that
complaint/case must be withdrawn before presentation of
second motion.
L. That after the grant of divorce by mutual
consent, since the matrimonial relationship of the parties
cease to exist, the parties and their family members shall
not initiate any legal proceedings including sending notices,
filing complaints, etc. against each other arising out of this
matrimonial relationship except the right created under this
"MOU"."
4. The marriage has already been dissolved by the learned Family Court
by order dated 25.04.2022. The complainant states that she has not received
any money from the petitioner. However, she states that she has since
remarried and is living peacefully with her husband. Complainant states that
she has entered into the settlement for her peace of mind and to live her life
happily with her husband.
5. It has repeatedly been held by the Apex Court that in the matrimonial
disputes, if the parties have settled the matter between themselves amicably,
it is the duty of Courts to encourage the same. Reliance can be placed on
B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675; Yashpal Chaudhrani
and Others vs. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) and Another; 2019 SCC
OnLine Del 8179
6. I consider that there would be no purpose of continuing with the trial
as the parties have entered into the settlement voluntarily without any fear,
force and coercion, and have decided to give quietus to the proceedings. It
was a matrimonial dispute which has now been settled.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances the Case FIR No.130/2017
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:28.04.2023
12:54:53
Neutral Citation Number :2023:DHC:2864
registered under section 498A/406/307/313/377/34 IPC and section 4 of
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and all the other proceedings emanating
therefrom is quashed. However, I consider that in this case some cost should
be imposed upon the petitioner. Hence each of the petitioners are directed to
deposit Rs. 10,000/- with Delhi State Legal Authority within four weeks.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J
APRIL 21, 2023/AR
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PALLAVI VERMA
Signing Date:28.04.2023
12:54:53
