Delhi High Court Dismisses Petition to Quash FIR in Marital Dispute Case

Court rules non-fulfillment of settlement terms and failure to finalize mutual consent divorce as grounds for dismissal.

In a significant decision, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, has dismissed a petition filed by Arvind Bhatnagar seeking to quash an FIR lodged against him under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR was registered at PS: Tuglak Road, New Delhi, following allegations of dowry harassment made by his estranged wife in 2005.

The petitioner had sought the quashing of the FIR based on a settlement agreement reached with his wife. As per the terms of the settlement, Bhatnagar agreed to pay a total of Rs. 35 lakh to settle all claims with his wife and children. Furthermore, the couple had initiated divorce proceedings by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act in a family court in Jodhpur. Despite the initial motion being recorded, the petitioner failed to appear for the second motion, leading to the dismissal of the divorce petition.

The court observed that the settlement agreement was not acted upon as the petitioner failed to fulfill his obligations, including the non-payment of the full agreed amount and the non-appearance for the second motion in the divorce proceedings. Consequently, the High Court concluded that the FIR cannot be quashed solely on the basis of an unfulfilled settlement.

The judgment highlighted that the petitioner's explanation for his non-appearance, citing urgent work commitments and the COVID-19 pandemic, was insufficient. The court noted that the petitioner's failure to act in accordance with the settlement terms, such as non-payment of the remaining Rs. 7 lakh and the absence at crucial court hearings, demonstrated a lack of intent to finalize the settlement.

The court further ruled that the divorce by mutual consent could not be restored, as both the Family Court and the High Court at Jodhpur had dismissed attempts to revive the petition due to the lack of mutual consent and fulfillment of settlement obligations.

The judgment underscores the importance of fulfilling settlement agreements and the procedural requirements in mutual consent divorce proceedings. It also highlights the court's unwillingness to quash criminal proceedings based solely on unexecuted settlements.

Bottom Line:

Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No.0182/2005 on the basis of alleged settlement agreement between husband and wife dismissed due to non-fulfillment of settlement terms and non-fructification of mutual consent divorce.

Statutory provision(s):  

• - Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973)
• - Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
• - Order IX Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Arvind Bhatnagar v. State, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2800735