SACHIN MALIK Vs. STATE AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. the petitioners seek quashing of the FIR No. 363/2008 registered against them under Sections 498A/406/307/506, IPC at P.S. H. Nizamuddin and criminal proceedings arising therefrom. Counsel for the petitioners state that the matter in dispute has been amicably settled between the parties with the intervention of Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee vide their order dated 7.8.2009. Counsel further submits that in terms of the said settlement arrived at between the parties, the petitioner has paid an amount of Rs. 5,25,000/- to the complainant in full and final settlement of all her material claims inclusive of Stridhan, maintenance (past, present and future), permanent alimony etc. Counsel also submits that the marriage of the parties has already been dissolved by mutual divorce vide judgment and decree dated 2.8.2010 passed by Ms. Raj Rani Mittra, ADJ, Patiala House Court. Counsel also submits that pursuant to the said settlement, the complainant has not pursued the petition filed by her under Section 125, Cr.P.C. and which already stands dismissed in default. Counsel also submits that no dispute of any nature any more survives between the parties. Counsel also submits that in terms of Clause 10 of the said compromise the petitioner/husband had agreed to return all the certificates/documents of the complainant/wife within a period of 15 days from the date of execution of the said settlement agreement, if any of such documents were found by him in his possession. Counsel further submits that after having made a thorough search the petitioner could not lay his hand on any of the certificates/documents of the complainant but the petitioner in his affidavit dated 28.1.2013 stated that he is prepared to bear all the expenses which may be incurred by the complainant in order to get duplicate certificates/documents. Counsel also submits that respondent No. 2 had appeared before this Court on 18.2.2011 when she took a stand that she has not been supplied her documents and certificates comprising four educational certificate, one LIC policy and documents relating to property/shop in her name, by the petitioner. Counsel further submits that thereafter respondent No. 2 appeared before this Court on 5.10.2012 when she strongly opposed the quashing of criminal proceedings against the petitioner on the ground that petitioner has failed to honour the terms of settlement in true letter and spirit. Counsel further submits that to show bonafides of the petitioner/husband, the petitioner is prepared to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the respondent No. 2/complainant for the expenses to be incurred by her for obtaining duplicate of her educational and other certificates.

(2.) I have heard Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

(3.) Vide order dated 5.10.2012 this Court directed respondent No. 2 to file an affidavit in opposition to the present petition in the form of an affidavit. In the affidavit filed by respondent No. 2, she has given details of educational certificates which as per her are lying in the custody and possession of the petitioner/husband. Respondent No. 2 has further given details of some property papers and LIC papers. Respondent No. 2 has further made an addition of valuable ornaments which she states are still lying with the petitioner/husband were never returned to her. After perusing the said affidavit of respondent No. 2 it is quite evident that respondent No. 2 has travelled much beyond the terms of settlement to claim jewellery articles and some other papers. It thus appears that respondent No. 2 is opposing the present petition for extraneous reasons. She is also not present today before the Court. Earlier also it has been noticed that she avoided to appear in the matter and the Court had to direct bailable warrants against her to secure her presence. As per Clause 10 of the Settlement Agreement petitioner/husband had agreed to return all certificates/documents of the complainant if he finds any of such documents with him within 15 days of the execution of this document. Earlier respondent No. 2 has filed her affidavit dated 11.11.2010 and perusal of the said affidavit clearly shows that no such objection was raised by her and infact she had extended her support in quashing of present FIR. The said objection taken by respondent No. 2 is clearly an exercise on her part to unnecessarily harass the petitioners. In the light of above discussion this Court is inclined to quash the said FIR No. 363/2006 under Sections 498A/406/307/506, IPC and the criminal proceedings emanating therefrom. The petitioner is however directed to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant. The demand draft for the said amount shall be handed over by the petitioner to the IO within a period of one week from the date of this order and the said DD shall be delivered by the IO to the complainant against receipt.