[Torturing Estranged Wife] “Offences Of Matrimonial Disputes Should Not Be Closed In A Routine Manner”: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court refused to quash a case against a man for allegedly torturing his estranged wife, observing the offences related to matrimonial relationships “should not be closed in a routine manner” especially when the victim opposes it. The high court called it a “textbook example” of how the affluent tried to flout the law by coercing the aggrieved party to settle the dispute despite it being a criminal offense and approached the courts with settlement deeds.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court declined to quash a criminal case against a man accused of torturing his estranged wife, stressing that offences involving matrimonial relationships “should not be closed in a routine manner,” particularly when the victim is opposed to it.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, presiding over the case, observed that although the estranged couple initially agreed to a mutual divorce decree and sought to settle all their disputes, the woman later contested the quashing of the case. She claimed her husband had reneged on the settlement by taking back the agreed-upon amount and continued to subject her to mistreatment.

The court described the situation as a “textbook example” of how wealthy individuals try to manipulate the legal system by coercing victims into settling disputes, despite the fact that the alleged acts are criminal in nature. These individuals often approach the courts with settlement agreements, hoping to close cases that still have serious legal implications.

In cases where both parties have reached a settlement, quashing the case might sometimes be appropriate to avoid wasting the court’s time with futile proceedings. However, the court emphasized that-

“offences pertaining to matrimonial relationships must not be quashed in a routine manner, especially if the victim of the said offence has opposed the quashing by denying the settlement.”

The High Court also pointed out that while it has wide powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, those powers should be exercised sparingly, particularly in situations where no significant harm is posed to society.

As per the terms of the original settlement, the woman was supposed to withdraw all her pending cases in exchange for a payment of Rs 45 lakh from her estranged husband. However, the woman opposed the man’s petition in the High Court, seeking to quash the criminal case. She argued that the memorandum of understanding was rendered null and void because the second motion of the divorce had not been executed.

Furthermore, she alleged that the man not only took back the settlement amount but also took the money she had earned from her independent business ventures.

While dismissing the man’s petition, the court concluded that there was no valid reason to quash the FIR, noting that the cause of action still existed and that the settlement agreement had not been honored by the man.

The court further stated that the man’s conduct constituted cruelty, which is a key factor in framing charges under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

“It is held that the petitioner (man) has been unable to put forth any propositions warranting exercise of inherent powers of this court as the petitioner’s conduct still includes the criminal nature of the offence for which he was charged with under the FIR,”

-the court said.

The Delhi High Court declared that the man’s plea lacked merit and allowed the criminal trial to proceed.

According to the case records, the couple was married in 2012, and by 2015, the wife had lodged an FIR against her husband, accusing him of criminal breach of trust and cruelty.

Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Matrimonial Disputes

FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES