The Delhi High Court has decided not to quash a criminal case against a man accused of torturing his estranged wife, emphasizing that matrimonial dispute cases should not be dismissed routinely, particularly when opposed by the victim. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh ruled against the dismissal of the case, highlighting the complexities and criminal aspects of such disputes.
The case initially moved towards a mutual consent divorce, with both parties agreeing on a settlement that included a divorce decree and a financial settlement of Rs 45 lakh to the wife. However, the situation took a turn when the wife contested the quashing of the FIR, alleging that her husband had reneged on the settlement by reclaiming the agreed amount and further subjecting her to torture.
The court described this case as a “textbook example” of how affluent individuals might attempt to circumvent legal accountability by coercing the aggrieved party into settling disputes outside the court, despite ongoing criminal behavior. Justice Singh stressed that settlements in such cases should not lead to automatic quashing of charges, especially when serious allegations of criminal conduct are involved and the victim disputes the terms of reconciliation.
While the court recognized its broad powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash proceedings, it noted these should be used sparingly. The discretion to quash should align with the broader interests of society and should not be exercised when the aggrieved party continues to face harm or disputes the resolution claims.
In this instance, the wife not only opposed the quashing but also claimed that the memorandum of understanding was invalid as the required second motion for the divorce had not been completed. She further accused her husband of financial deceit, including reclaiming the settlement and misappropriating funds from her independent business.
Ultimately, the High Court dismissed the man’s petition to quash the FIR, finding no grounds to override the serious allegations against him. The court held that the actions described by the wife, if proven, would satisfy the criteria for criminal charges under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, which addresses cruelty by a husband or his relatives.
