Matrimonial FIR Cannot Be Quashed Without a Signed Settlement Between Estranged Spouses: Delhi High Court

Case Name: Arvind Bhatnagar Versus State and Another. 

Introduction

The Delhi High Court has ruled that it cannot quash matrimonial FIR in situations where there is no proper settlement agreement between the estranged spouses. In a verdict, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna denied requests to quash a 2005 FIR filed by a wife against her husband residing in Dubai on charges of dowry harassment. The Court stated that there was a lack of reason to quash the criminal proceedings because of the absence of a settlement agreement. Justice Krishna stressed that an agreement never carried out could not override the statutory protections enshrined in matrimonial and criminal law.

High Court emphasizes the importance of a duly executed settlement in matrimonial FIR cases

Background of the Case

On January 25, 1991, the couple entered a legal Hindu marriage in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh from the said wedlock, they have two children in the wife's custody. The relationship began to be broken down in 2005 and ultimately resulted in the couple living apart. The wife made a complaint on October 26, 2005, about the husband and his parents for harassment because of the dowry, which resulted in an FIR. During the complaint proceedings, the petitioner’s mother was acquitted by the court in 2017, whereas the parties eventually reached an out-of-court settlement in which the petitioner would pay Rs. 35,00,000 to the wife and their children in full satisfaction with the claims, including Rs. 2,00,000 worth of jewellery and items. The parties filed a mutual divorce petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act in the Family Court in Jodhpur, Rajasthan, in October 2018. The petitioner deposited Rs. 30,00,000 in Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) in the names of the wife and children to be released once the FIR was quashed, and the remaining payment was Rs. 5,00,000 to be paid after the divorce decree.

Although due to the petitioner’s incapacity to appear in court, the divorce petition could not be completed, as he was working in Dubai, and international travel was restricted during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, the Family Court rejected the application. The criminal proceedings are pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi. The petitioner accordingly filed an application requesting a quashing of the FIR in view of the settlement agreement.

High Court’s observation in Matrimonial Settlement

The Delhi High Court refused to quash against the petitioner-husband for purported dowry harassment, noting that the settlement agreement between the parties had not been executed. The petitioner sought quashing of the FIR based on a settlement dated October 4, 2018, under which he agreed to pay a total of ₹37,00,000 to his wife and children. Out of this amount, ₹30,00,000 was deposited through six Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs), while the remaining ₹7,00,000 was to be paid after the grant of divorce by mutual consent.

The Court noted that the petitioner did not appear before the Family Court, Jodhpur, to record his statement for the second motion of divorce. This lack of appearance resulted in the dismissal of the mutual consent of divorce petition for non-prosecution. All petitions for restoration were additionally dismissed. The High Court noted that although the FDRs were deposited, the respondent-wife never received any funds, nor was any settlement acted upon. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna was of the opinion that depositing amounts without fulfilling the settlement or completing the divorce is not the same as having fulfilled the terms of settlement. Since there was no settlement that had been executed or implemented, this was not a basis for quashing the FIR. Consequently, there was no reason to quash FIR No. 0182/2005, because the compromise had not been effected between the parties. The petition was dismissed for being without merit, and all pending applications were disposed of.

Way forward

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, of the Delhi High Court, emphasized that the dismissal of matrimonial FIRs as per Section 482 CrPC is allowable only when the settlement between estranged spouses has been duly executed and acted upon. The judgement underscores that a mere deposit of money or partial compliance cannot substitute for the complete execution of a settlement. 

Empower Your Legal Practice with AI – Join Our Free Webinar!

Are you a legal professional looking to boost your efficiency and stay ahead in a competitive field? Discover the power of Lawttorney.AI – the cutting-edge tool designed to streamline legal research, automate tasks, and enhance productivity.

👉 Don't miss out! Reserve your spot in our FREE webinar and experience the future of legal practice today. Register Now