Delhi High Court

Sh. Chhatter Pal & Ors. vs State & Anr. on 16 May, 2023

Author:
Swarana Kanta Sharma

Bench:
Swarana Kanta Sharma

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Reserved on: 15.03.2023
Pronounced on: 16.05.2023
+ CRL.M.C. 6197/2019
SH. CHHATTER PAL & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. P.K. Anand, Advocate.
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP for the
State with SI Tej Ram, P.S. Uttam
Nagar.
Ms. Shanta Pandey, Mr. Hiren
Dasan, Ms. Preeti Chauhan,
Advocates for R-2 with R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
JUDGMENT

Index to the Judgment
I. History and Facts of the case.................................................................. 2
II. Contentions of the Counsels ................................................................... 4
III. Mediated Settlement Agreement in question ....................................... 5
IV. Analysis and Findings............................................................................. 7
V. Concern and Duty of the Court ........................................................... 17

(a) Dispute Over Clause Which Resolved The Dispute: Reasons .......... 17

(b) Guidelines Apropos Drafting A Settlement Agreement in
Matrimonial Disputes with Special Reference to Clauses dealing with
Criminal Cases ........................................................................................ 20

(c) Judicial Realism: Urgent Need To Have Settlement Agreements In
Hindi ........................................................................................................ 24
i. Preparation of Mediated Settlement Agreements in Hindi .............. 25
VI. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 26
VII. Way Forward ....................................................................................... 28

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 1 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

1. By way of present petition filed under
Section 482
of the Code of
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ('
Cr.P.C
'), quashing of FIR bearing no.
519/2012, registered at Police Station Uttam Nagar, for the offences
punishable under
Sections 498A
/
/
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
('
IPC
') has been sought qua the present petitioners.

I. HISTORY AND FACTS OF THE CASE

2. Brief facts of the present case are that the marriage between the
complainant i.e. respondent no. 2 and co-accused Lalit was solemnized
on 23.01.2011. It is stated that there was irretrievable breakdown of the
marriage due to incompatible behaviour, conduct and temperament of
the parties. Thereafter, on the complaint of respondent no. 2 alleging
physical and mental cruelty for demand of dowry and beating by her
husband and in-laws, the present FIR was registered against the husband
as well as the petitioners i.e. brother of husband's father, his son, and
elder brother of husband.

3. The matter was referred to mediation centre at the time of hearing
of anticipatory bail application of the accused husband. Fortunately, the
matter was amicably settled before the mediation centre and all the
disputes were resolved between the parties which were reduced to
writing by way of a mediated settlement agreement dated 30.07.2014.

4. The story of the dispute culminating into an agreement to settle all
disputes past, present and future, thus, had a happy ending for both the
parties as the agreement was to the contentment of both the parties.

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 2 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

However, there was a twist in the story as now the police filed a
chargesheet against all the accused persons and the police duly informed
the learned Magistrate about the settlement arrived at between the
parties and the quashment clause in the agreement. In the meantime, the
petition to quash FIR was filed by the husband as only he had been
summoned by the learned Magistrate and the FIR was quashed against
the husband before summons could reach him. Thus, even husband or
his relatives did not know that chargesheet had been filed by police, as
the summons were to reach the husband before 25.08.2015. The twists in
the story did not end here as now the other relatives of the husband i.e.
petitioners were summoned by the learned Magistrate. By the time the
present petitioners realised that they too needed to get the FIR quashed
against them, another twist awaited them after eight years which was
unforeseen that by this time, the other key player of the story i.e the
complainant conveniently changed her mind and appeared before this
Court only to inform that she had not entered into agreement with them
but only with her husband and therefore, FIR cannot be quashed, even
after receiving the entire amount of settlement including the amount for
quashing of FIR.

5. This Court, therefore, had a situation at hand where the petitioners
herein had a bumpy ride so far as the present litigation is concerned.
They were lucky that the matter was amicably settled even before the
chargesheet could be filed before the learned Magistrate, however, they
were unlucky that the settlement agreement did not mention their names.
They were blissfully unaware of the fact that they were also accused in
this case. They were lucky that the chargesheet was filed without
arresting them but they were unlucky that the Magistrate was

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 3 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

constrained to summon them after taking cognizance against them, since
the FIR in question was not quashed qua them. In other words, they
thought that they were fortunate that the FIR had been quashed, but
unfortunately, the entire amount was paid to the complainant for
quashing of the FIR without their names being included in the quashing
petition. And even now, their misfortune, as far as the present litigation
is concerned, has not come to an end as the complainant now refuses to
give her statement for quashing of the FIR.

II. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSELS

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that complainant/
respondent no. 2 has no grievance against the accused persons and she is
not willing to support the imputations made in FIR because the dispute
in question has already been settled/compromised between the parties in
terms of Mediated Settlement Agreement dated 30.07.2014 arrived at
before Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi. It is further stated that
the present petitioners could not file a petition for quashing of FIR since
the investigating officer did not give any notice under
Section 160

Cr.P.C to the petitioners on the day of registration of FIR. It is further
stated that inadvertently, the earlier petition for quashing of FIR i.e.
CRL.M.C. 3069/2015 was filed only by the husband and could not be
filed by present petitioners, however the settlement agreement explicitly
mentions that FIR shall be quashed qua all accused persons. Hence, it is
stated that FIR be quashed.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for complainant/respondent no. 2
argues that the Mediated Settlement Agreement dated 30.07.2014 was
only qua husband of the complainant and FIR in respect of the husband

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 4 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

already stands quashed. It is further stated that only the husband had
signed the settlement agreement and not the present petitioners. It is,
however, admitted by learned counsel for respondent no. 2 that FIR qua
husband stands quashed vide order dated 31.07.2015 and that respondent
no. 2 has already received payment of Rs.2,75,000/- towards full and
final settlement of her claims including dowry articles, stridhan,
alimony, maintenance of past, present and future, as well as all other
claims and rights as per the terms of Settlement Agreement. The
complainant after issuance of Court notice appeared before the Court
and submitted that she has settled the case only with her husband,
though she admits that she has received the entire settlement amount,
including Rs.65,000/- received for quashing of FIR on 31.07.2015 as per
settlement agreement. She states that matter may again be sent for
mediation qua the present accused(s) and she will settle the matter again
with them, as the money in this case was given by her husband and she
had, thus, settled it with him only.

8. This Court has heard the rival contentions raised on behalf of both
the parties and has perused the material on record.

III. MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN QUESTION

9. For proper adjudication of the present case, it shall be imperative
to reproduce the Mediated Settlement Agreement dated 30.07.2014 for
reference, which reads as under:

"30.07.2014
Present: Ms. Neeru, complainant alongwith Sh. Anoop Kumar
Sharma, & Ms. Gulshan Jahan, Advocates.

Sh. Lalit, applicant/ respondent in person alongwith Sh. P.K.
Anand, Advocate.

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 5 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

This matter has been referred by the court of Sh. Mukesh
Kumar Gupta, Ld. MM, ASJ-02, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and has
been assigned to me for mediation.

Process of mediation explained to both the parties. Single and
joint sessions were held. After discussions, both parties have
agreed to compromise their disputes in full and final on the
following terms and conditions:-

"1. It has been agreed between the parties that both the parties i.e.
complainant and respondent no. l shall dissolve the marriage by
way of filing a petition under
Section 13(B)(1)
and
13(B)(2)
of
HMA.

2. It has also been agreed between the parties that the joint
petition for dissolution of marriage shall be filed on or before
13.09.2014 and the second motion under
Section 13 (B)(2)
of
HMA shall be filed within one week after the expiry of the
statutory period of six months.

3. It has been agreed between the parties that the respondent no.
l shall make a payment of Rs,2,75,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh
Seventy Five Thousand only) to the complainant towards her full
and final settlement including dowry articles, istridhan,
alimony/ maintenance of past, present and future and all other
claims and/rights.

4. It has also been agreed between the parties that the above said
amount of Rs.2,75,000/- shall be paid in four installments. The first
installment of Rs. 70,000/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand only) shall
be paid on 13.08.2014, on the hearing of the case under
Section
Cr.RC., pending before the Court of Sh. Brijesh Sethi, Ld.
Principal Judge, Family Courts, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. The
second installment of Rs. 70,000/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand
only) shall be paid by the respondent no. l to the complainant at the
time of recording of their statements under
Section 13 (B) (1)
of
HMA and the third installment of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees Seventy
Thousand only) shall be paid by the respondent to the complainant
at the time of recording of their statement in the proceedings under

Section 13 (B) (2)
of HMA.

5. It has also been agreed between the parties that a petition shall
be filed under
Section 482
Cr.P.C. by the respondents for
quashing of FIR bearing No 519/12 under
Section 498-A
/
/
IPC with PS Uttam Nagar and the complainant shall cooperate
with the respondents and also shall file her affidavit for the
quashing of the FIR. She will also make a statement in terms of the
compromise arrived between the parties before the Hon'ble High
Court.

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 6 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

6. That the fourth and last installment of Rs.65,000/- (Rupees
Sixty Five Thousand only) shall be paid by the respondent no. l to
the complainant at the time of disposal of the petition under

Section 482
Cr.P.C for the quashing of the above said FIR.

7. It has also been agreed between the parties that the petition
for quashing of the FIR shall also be filed by both the parties
within one month from the date of disposal of petition under

Section 13 (B) (2)
of HMA.

8. It has been agreed between the parties that the complainant
shall withdraw the case under
Section 125
Cr.P.C. from the Court
of Sh. Brijesh Sethi, Ld. Principal Judge, Family Courts, Tis
Hazari Courts, Delhi after the disposal of the petition under

Section 13(B) (2)
of HMA.

9. It has also been agreed between the parties that this settlement
is full and final and both parties undertake not to file any
case/complaint/suit/petition against each other and shall be entitled
to lead their life independently and both the parties shall not
interfere in the life of each other and family members of each
other.

This settlement has been voluntarily arrived at between the
parties with their own freewill and without any force, pressure or
coercion and both the parties are bound on the terms and
conditions herein above. The contents of the settlement have been
explained to the parties in vernacular and they have understood the
same and have admitted the same to be correct."

(Emphasis supplied)

IV. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

10. A bare perusal of the aforesaid Mediated Settlement Agreement
reveals that it has been clearly mentioned in clause 5 of the Agreement
that the complainant shall "cooperate with the respondents" and shall
file her affidavit for quashing of the FIR. It is further mentioned that she
will also make a statement in terms of compromise arrived at between
the parties before this Court. It is, thus, clear that the settlement
agreement between the parties towards full and final settlement was not
with the husband alone, and in case it was so, the word 'respondents'
would not have been mentioned in Clause 5 of the Agreement.

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 7 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

11. Furthermore, clause 9 of the Agreement also mentions that the
settlement entered into between the parties was "full and final" and that
both the parties undertook to not file any "case/complaint/suit/petition
against each other". It was also agreed that they "shall be entitled to
lead their life independently and both the parties shall not interfere in
the life of each other and family members of each other". The
concluding clause also records that the settlement between the parties
had been voluntarily arrived at with their own free will and without any
force, pressure or coercion, and that the parties would remain bound by
the terms of the agreement.

12. If the Settlement Agreement is scrutinized from a close angle, it
will be revealed that though it has been signed by the husband only, it is
clear from the contents of the agreement that the settlement was being
arrived at on behalf of all the respondents i.e. co-accused persons in
present FIR since they were his close family members.

13. Moreover, in the judgment dated 27.03.2015 vide which divorce
was granted to both the parties, it is mentioned in para no. 5 that
complainant had stated on oath that she had settled all her claims of past,
present and future maintenance, and that the final instalment of
Rs.65,000/- would be paid to her at the time of final disposal of the
petition under
Section 482
Cr.P.C. for quashing the present FIR.
Therefore, even before the learned Family Court, the complainant/
respondent no. 2 did not state that she would make her statement for
quashing of FIR only qua the husband and not in respect of other
accused persons i.e. petitioners herein.

14. The complainant in the present case had signed the Settlement
Agreement voluntarily, and thereafter, had also appeared before this

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 8 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

Court for the purpose of quashing of FIR against the husband i.e.
petitioner in CRL.M.C. 3069/2015, wherein the FIR qua the husband
was quashed vide order dated 31.07.2015. The operative part of the said
order passed by this Court reads as under:

"...Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid
Mediated Settlement and terms thereof have been folly acted upon
as today, she has received the balance settled amount of Rs.
65,000/- by way of two demand drafts and that divorce by mutual
consent has been already granted by the family court on 27"

March, 2015. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of aforesaid
Mediated Settlement and of her affidavit of supporting this petition
and submits that now no dispute with petitioner survives, and so,
the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an
end.

***
Accordingly, this petition is allowed and FIR No.519/2012, under

Sections 498-A
/
/
of IPC registered at police station Uttaih
Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are
quashed qua petitioner..."

15. In the case at hand, upon a close perusal and scrutiny of the
records, it transpires that the instant matter had been referred for
mediation at the time of hearing of anticipatory bail application of the
husband of the complainant when rest of the accused persons were not
even present before the Court concerned and the accused/husband had
appeared on behalf of other respondents also before mediator as they
were his close family members and were primarily facing criminal
action due to his matrimonial discord with the complainant. In view of
the settlement dated 30.07.2014 arrived at between the parties, the
husband was admitted to anticipatory bail. Having compromised the
matter with his wife, the husband had filed the petition i.e. Crl.M.C. No.
3069/2015 for quashing of FIR and by that point of time, charge sheet

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 9 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

had not been filed by the prosecution. Thereafter, because the matter had
been compromised between the parties, the relatives of the husband were
kept in column no. 11 in the chargesheet i.e. they were chargesheeted
without arrest.

16. Since the matter had already been settled, the learned Magistrate,
pursuant to filing of the chargesheet, had taken cognizance of the
offence only against the husband, and had neither taken cognizance nor
had issued summons to rest of the family members. It was also
mentioned that cognizance qua other accused persons would be taken
only if the accused husband fails to take any steps with regard to filing
of quashing petition. In this regard, a reference can be made to the order
dated 14.07.2015 passed by learned Magistrate which reads as under:

"...It is submitted by the IO that matter has been settled between
the parties before the mediation centre on 30.07.2015. Copy of
mediation order attached with the charge sheet.
Heard. Record perused.

Considering the fact that matter has been settled, I take cognizance
for the offence
u/s 498A
/
/
IPC against the accused/husband
Lalit Raj only at this very stage.

Cognizance qua rest of the respondents will be considered if no
step is taken by the accused for filing quashing petition.
Let summons to the accused Lalit Raj be issued through IO
concerned returnable on 25.08.2015..."

17. Considering the aforesaid observations of the learned Magistrate
and the fact that the husband alone had been summoned to appear before
the Court, only the husband would have deemed it appropriate to file the
quashing petition since the impression was that the FIR was filed solely
against him. Subsequently, when the FIR was quashed specifically in
relation to him by this Court vide order dated 31.07.2015, the learned

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 10 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

Magistrate was pleased to issue court notice to other accused persons by
way of following order dated 25.08.2015:

"...None for accused despite repeated calls. Court is already in
receipt of order dated 31.07.2015 passed by Hon'ble High Court
whereby present FIR No. 519/12
u/s 498A
/
/
IPC PS Uttam
Nagar has been quashed for accused Lalit Raj.
It is submitted by Ld. APP for the State that as the FIR has already
been quashed, hence nothing is left to be adjudicated upon.
In view of the same, after the quashing of FIR, nothing survives
against the accused Lalit Raj. The accused Lalit Raj is discharged.
His surety also stand discharged. The documents of the surety if
any attached with the bonds, be returned to him against
acknowledgment after cancellation of endorsement.
At this stage, it is submitted by the Ld. APP for the State that the
present quashing petition has been quashed against accused Lalit
Raj only, hence he request for summoning rest of the accused
persons.

Heard.

Let court notice be issued to rest of the accused persons to be
executed through IO concerned, for 28.09.2015..."

18. Further, four accused persons including the present petitioners
were summoned by the learned Magistrate vide order dated 28.09.2015,
which reads as under:

"...It is submitted by the Ld. Defence counsel that FIR has already
been quashed. To this, Ld. Substitute APP for the State submits
that FIR has been quashed against accused Lalit Raj and there are
specific allegation against rest of the accused persons, hence he
request to take cognizance against rest of the accused persons.
Heard.

In the quashing order it has been specifically mentioned that the
FIR has been quashed only against the applicant who is the
accused Lalit Raj and in mediation cell also matter got settled
between accused Lalit Raj and complainant.

In view of the above, relying upon the submission of Ld. APP for
the State and finding specific allegation, let summons be issued to
accused Rukmani, Chhatarpal, Vijay and Rajiv to be executed
through IO concerned, for 26.10.2015..."

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 11 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

19. It was only after the rest of the accused persons i.e. petitioners
were summoned by the learned Magistrate that they realized the need to
file a petition for quashing of the FIR. Considering the non-legal
backgrounds of the parties involved and the specific circumstances of
this case, it is plausible that the present petitioners might have assumed
that they did not have to file a quashing petition since they had not been
earlier summoned by the learned Magistrate.

20. To sum up the timeline of the present case, it may be noted that at
the time of hearing of anticipatory bail application filed by the husband
pursuant to registration of present FIR, the case had been referred for
mediation by the Court concerned and thereafter, the matter had been
settled. Thus, after the FIR was quashed in relation to the husband as
cognizance had only been taken against him by the learned Magistrate,
the other family members i.e. the petitioners herein may have been
oblivious to the fact that they could have been summoned by the Court
and the matter, which had been resolved amicably in the year 2014, may
be prolonged for another 10 years.

21. Though the complainant has already received the amount that she
was to get for quashing of FIR, the FIR was unfortunately quashed only
qua the husband and not against rest of the family members even though
the term 'respondents' had been mentioned in clause 5 of the Settlement
Agreement which clearly depicts the intention to quash the entire FIR
against all the accused persons. Moreover, the fact that the Agreement
also mentions that it is full and final settlement of all past, present and
future claims with each other and that they will not interfere in each
other's life or in the life of family members of each other, makes it clear
that the complainant was well aware that the agreement was being

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 12 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

arrived at between herself and all the respondents. She was also duly
assisted by her counsels who would have made it clear to her at the time
of signing the mediation agreement.

22. However, seeking to take advantage of the situation in which the
present petitioners are, the complainant appeared before this Court and
stated that the Mediated Settlement Agreement dated 30.07.2014 was
only between her and her husband. She also stated that the monetary
settlement arrived at between the parties was also qua the husband only
and matter may again be sent for mediation if the present petitioners also
wanted the FIR to be quashed against them.

23. This approach of the complainant, in the considered opinion of
this Court, is neither correct nor acceptable as she has already received
the entire amount as per the settlement agreement towards settlement of
all her claims and matrimonial disputes as well as for quashing of
present FIR. In case this Court returns a finding that the settlement was
arrived solely between the wife/complainant and the husband, it would
undermine the fundamental objective of the process of mediation in this
case. Suffice it to say, the very purpose of mediation in this case has
already been defeated as legal proceedings have been prolonged and
dragged on for 10 long years despite a successful mediation between the
parties.

24.
In the given set of facts and circumstances, this Court deems it fit
to advert to the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
Ruchi
Agarwal v. Amit Kumar Agrawal
(2005) 3 SCC 299, wherein the Apex
Court while quashing the criminal proceedings against the accused
husband on the basis of compromise even though the complainant had
refused to give her consent, had observed as under:

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 13 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

"6. From the above narrated facts, it is clear that in the compromise
petition filed before the Family Court, the appellant admitted that
she has received Stridhan and maintenance in lump sum and that
she will not be entitled to maintenance of any kind in future. She
also undertook to withdraw all proceedings civil and criminal filed
and initiated by her against the respondents within one month of
the compromise deed which included the complaint under
Sections
498A
,
and
IPC and under
Sections 3
and
of Dowry
Prohibition Act from which complaint this appeal arises. In the
said compromise, the respondent- husband agreed to withdraw his
petition filed under
Section 9
of the Hindu Marriage Act pending
before the Senior Judge, Civil Division, Rampur and also agreed to
give a consent divorce as sought for by the appellant.

7. It is based on the said compromise the appellant obtained a
divorce as desired by her under
Section 13(B)
of the Hindu
Marriage Act and in partial compliance of the terms of the
compromise she withdrew the criminal case filed under
Section
of the Criminal Procedure Code but for reasons better known
to her she did not withdraw that complaint from which this appeal
arises. That apart after the order of the High Court quashing the
said complaint on the ground of territorial jurisdiction, she has
chosen to file this appeal. It is in this background, we will have to
appreciate the merits of this appeal.

8. ....Therefore, we are of the opinion that the appellant having
received the relief she wanted without contest on the basis of the
terms of the compromise, we cannot now accept the argument of
the learned counsel for the appellant. In our opinion, the conduct of
the appellant indicates that the criminal complaint from which this
appeal arises was filed by the wife only to harass the respondents.

9. In view of the above said subsequent events and the conduct of
the appellant, it would be an abuse of the process of the court if the
criminal proceedings from which this appeal arises is allowed to
continue. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion to do
complete justice, we should while dismissing this appeal also
quash proceedings arising from the Criminal Case
No.Cr.No.224/2003 registered in Police Station, Bilaspur,
(Distt.Rampur) filed under
Sections 498A
,
and
IPC and
under
Sections 3
and
of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the
respondents herein..."

25. This Court in Purshotam Gupta v. State Crl.M.C. 3230-32/2006,
while dealing with a situation wherein the complainant wife had refused

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 14 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

to appear before the Court for quashing of FIR after having received all
the settlement amount and after divorce proceedings had been
concluded, had also quashed the FIR against the accused husband with
the following observations:

"13. This court cannot but accept the statements made on oath by
Respondent No. 2 accepting the terms of the compromise and
recorded by and forming part of the record of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court. She has also accepted the sum of Rs. 4 lakhs
in terms of the compromise. The divorce has been granted and the
criminal case for maintenance stands withdrawn. Only the last bit
regarding the quashing of the criminal proceedings under
Sections
498A
,
/
IPC remains. With the Respondent No. 2 not
appearing in these proceedings to contest the petition, the
assertions of the petitioners as noted hereinabove remain
uncontroverter.

14. This Court is therefore inclined to follow the aforementioned
two decisions of the Supreme Court in Ruchi Agarwal and Mohd.
Shamim and quash the pending criminal proceedings against the
petitioners. It may be mentioned that the learned APP for the State
also does not dispute the facts stated in the petition or the law as
settled by the Supreme Court. He expresses no objection the
quashing of the FIR in view of the aforesaid developments.

15. Consequently the FIR No. 575 of 2002 registered in Police
Station Rajouri Garden, New Delhi on 26th July 2002 under

Sections 498A
,
/
IPC and all proceedings consequent thereto
hereby stand quashed. The petition is allowed but with no order as
to costs."

26. A similar view was also taken by this Court in
Dalbir Singh v.
State
2011 SCC OnLine Del 3528.

27. The present petitioners had been victims of circumstances not
only in the past when they had failed to file quashing petitions for
having not been summoned by the learned Magistrate, but now again,
since the complainant, despite having received the full and final

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 15 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

settlement amount, has refused to give her statement for quashing of the
FIR.

28. Upon a careful analysis and calibration of how the mediation
process was conducted in this case from start to finish and keeping in
mind the peculiar circumstances of the present case, it is difficult to
accept that the settlement in this case was only qua husband for the
purpose of quashing of FIR. As the surrounding circumstances indicate,
the negotiations and execution of the settlement agreement took place
pursuant to a Court referred mediation, and both the parties had engaged
legal counsels and after negotiations, the substance of the agreement had
been reduced into writing, which is a matter of dispute today. The
complainant had understood and acted upon the agreement in question
as she had filed petition for obtaining mutual consent divorce, had
withdrawn certain cases and FIR against husband had been quashed and
she had received all the money that she had agreed to as full and final
settlement of the dispute with the husband and had undertaken that both
of them will not interfere in peaceful life of each other and their family
members life. The settlement agreement therefore, has to be accessed in
the context of the circumstances in which it has reached this Court.

29. Thus, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case
and for the reasons stated in the preceding discussion, this Court is of the
view that it would be gross injustice to the present petitioners if the
criminal proceedings arising out of instant FIR qua them are allowed to
be continued, when the complainant had already settled all her
matrimonial disputes, had undertaken not to interfere in lives of family
members of her husband, and had also received monetary sum including

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 16 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

Rs.65,000/- specifically for the purpose of quashing FIR against
'respondents' (i.e. accused persons) in the present case.

V. CONCERN AND DUTY OF THE COURT

(a) Dispute Over Clause Which Resolved The Dispute: Reasons

30. However, before parting with this case, this Court notes that the
dispute in question has arisen primarily due to an inadequately worded
and ambiguous Mediated Settlement Agreement.

31. In the process of mediation, the task of drafting an agreement at
the culmination of long, arduous and challenging mediation proceedings
carries significant responsibility. Each word included in the agreement
holds importance for the parties involved. This is particularly crucial in
cases involving criminal matters, as omission of even a single word can
lead to severe legal ramifications and the interested parties can exploit
such loopholes to their advantage, causing disadvantages to the opposing
party.

32. The primary objective of mediation in matrimonial cases is to
facilitate early resolution of disputes outside the Courts. In India,
matrimonial disputes often include criminal proceedings. In case of
comprehensive settlement agreements between the parties, especially
when law mandates mediation in cases of family and matrimonial
disputes, a number of issues should be considered and the settlement
agreements arrived at from successful mediation must be drafted with
due care and caution, so that the very purpose of mediation is not
defeated.

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 17 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

33. In cases relating to matrimonial offences, at times, there are
distant relatives, old parents, married sisters, etc. who are also involved
and arraigned as accused, but they may not attend the mediation
proceedings as the same generally will take place between the two key
players i.e. the husband and wife. In such cases, the disputes are often
settled on behalf of the entire family by the husband. The mediator
while drafting an agreement must remember that the parties have come
to an understanding and have reached a mediated settlement with
willingness to resolve the disputes due to the skills of the mediator and
help of family, friends, counsels etc., however, their own needs and
protection of their interests remains paramount.

34. In the present case, as already discussed at length, the complainant
had settled all her matrimonial disputes and had received Rs.2,75,000/-
towards full and final settlement of all her claims and had also agreed to
cooperate in quashing of FIR qua the 'respondents'. However, ambiguity
and lack of clarity in the Mediated Settlement Agreement was sought to
be misused before this Court by the complainant.

35. Rather than merely writing in the Settlement Agreement that a
petition for quashing would be filed "by the respondents for quashing of
FIR", had the mediator specifically mentioned that the FIR as well as all
proceedings emanating therefrom were to be quashed qua all the accused
persons, along with their names
,
in that case
, even if the learned
Magistrate was to decide on issuance of summons to the accused
persons, the said Agreement drafted by the Mediator would have come
to the rescue of the present petitioners. In such a situation, the
complainant would have been bound to co-operate even in those
proceedings which emanated from the same FIR. In other words, the

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 18 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

Mediated Settlement Agreement in the present case should have been
more explicit, particularly in terms of clearly identifying and specifying
the names of all the respondents referred to in the agreement.

36. The Mediator should have ensured that all the persons against
whom allegations had been levelled and were named in the FIR,
quashing of which was agreed between the parties, their names and
identities were clearly spelt out in the Settlement Agreement, rather than
using the general term 'respondents'.

37. Therefore, as gathered by this Court after going through entire
records, lack of incorporation of specific names of the respondents, or
persons named in the FIR, in the Settlement Agreement has put the
parties concerned at disadvantage and has resulted in unwanted
prolonging of criminal proceedings, which were already settled between
them long back. The very purpose of resolving the dispute at the earliest
has been successfully defeated in the present case despite a successful
mediation due to a carelessly worded Mediated Settlement Agreement.

38. There is no denying the fact that each case that reaches mediation
and successfully culminates into a settlement is based on its own
circumstances and dynamics.

39. To put it differently, an inadequately drafted agreement will be
the one which fails to include essential elements such as the name of all
the relevant parties, the terms outlining the conditions of settlement, and
the consequences in the event of non-compliance or breach.

40. While deliberating upon such issues, this Court also takes note of
the decision rendered by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in
Rajat
Gupta v. Rupali Gupta
2018 SCC OnLine Del 9005, wherein four
questions of law had been sent for consideration by way of reference,

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 19 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

and the Court had laid down detailed guidelines regarding drawing up
petitions and agreements in cases filed for divorce by mutual consent.

41. The mediation process involving family disputes, albeit, is no
more in its infancy in India. However, considering the problems that
arise in such disputes, it is still evolving and trying to grapple with new
problems which may arise on several grounds. While there can be no
fixed pattern for preparing an agreement or a performa to fill in for the
purpose of affecting a settlement before a mediator, the mediators
dealing especially with matrimonial disputes should keep in mind that
such agreements are reached with an intent to attain finality to all the
disputes. In matrimonial disputes, the parties in majority of cases want
the disputes to be settled at the earliest while the emotions and tempers
run high. While the Mediator performs the duty of not only dealing with
those tempers but also their disagreements and emotions, the mediator
also has another responsibility to ensure that the agreement reached by
the parties, as well as the hard work of the parties, their families,
counsels and the Mediator, is crystalised. It is unfortunate to note that
these attempts fail in a large number of cases, and the parties find
themselves in conflict once again due to flaws or ambiguities in the
settlement agreements.

(b) Guidelines Apropos Drafting A Settlement Agreement in
Matrimonial Disputes with Special Reference to Clauses dealing
with Criminal Cases

42. Having discussed the significance of process of mediation in
resolution of a dispute, especially those arising out of family and

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 20 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

matrimonial cases, and having taken note of complexities that can arise
due to inadequate drafting, inconsistencies, omissions or oversights
within a settlement agreement achieved between parties subsequent to a
successful mediation, this Court deems it appropriate to lay down
following guidelines in relation to drafting of a Mediated Settlement
Agreement, in addition to the guidelines laid down:

(i) Specify Names of Parties: The agreement must specifically
contain names of all the parties to the agreement.

(ii) Avoid Ambiguous Terms: The terms such as 'respondent',
'respondents', 'petitioner' or 'petitioners', in absence of
their names in the agreement must be avoided in an
agreement as it leads to ambiguities and further litigation.

(iii) Include All Details: The terms and conditions of the
agreement reached between the parties, howsoever small and
minute they may be, must be incorporated in the agreement.

(iv) Timeline For Compliance: The timeline of the fulfilment
of terms and conditions as well as their execution must be
clearly mentioned. There should be no tentative dates as far
as possible.

(v) Default Clause: A default clause should be incorporated in
the agreement and the consequences thereof should be
explained and enlisted in the agreement itself.

(vi) Mode of Payment: In case any payment is to be made as per
settlement, the agreement should specify the method of
payment agreed upon between the parties which should also

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 21 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

be as per their convenience i.e. electronic mode, by way of a
Demand Draft or FDR and the necessary details for
fulfilment of this condition.

(vii) Follow-Up Documents: The agreement should also
stipulate as to which Follow-up documents are to be
prepared and signed by which party. It may also be
mentioned as to when, where, how and at whose cost such
documents are to be prepared in furtherance of the terms of
the agreement, as far as possible.

(viii) Cases involving 498A
IPC
: Further, especially in cases of
matrimonial disputes, where one of the conditions in the
Agreement is to cooperate in quashing of FIR, such as those
under
Section 498A
IPC, and filing of affidavit and
appearing in the Court for the purpose of the same, it is
advisable that the agreement must stipulate the names of all
the parties concerned who have been named in the FIR
specifically and the fact that the claims have been settled in
totality for quashing of entire FIR and proceedings
emanating therefrom qua all persons named in the FIR. It be
also clarified specifically that the FIR will be quashed in
totality against all the persons arrested, not arrested,
chargesheeted, not chargesheeted, with their names and
whether the entire FIR will be quashed against all of them
upon payment by husband or any other person on behalf of
the husband.

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 22 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

(ix) Criminal Complaints/Cross-cases: Criminal Complaints
filed by parties against each other, pending trial or
investigation should also find specific mention with names
of all the parties, the Court concerned, and as to how the
parties intend to deal with them. The number/details of the
complaint, FIR, Sections under which they have been filed,
should also be mentioned specifically.

(x) Read and Understood: The agreement should necessarily
mention that all the parties have read and understood the
contents of the settlement agreement in their vernacular
language.

(xi) Signing of Agreement: In case only one or some parties are
present during mediation proceedings and only their
signatures are obtained on the agreement, it be clearly
mentioned and clarified that the agreement is being signed
on behalf of those relatives or parties also even in case they
are not present, in case the agreement is qua them too and
they are not present in person due to age, ailment, distance
or any other reason. It is important to do so since in
matrimonial offences, the near and distant relatives may, due
to above reasons, not be present in person but agreements
are reached in totality, especially regarding quashing of FIRs
and criminal proceedings and withdrawal of complaints.

(xii) Clarity of Language: At last, the language used in a
settlement agreement must be definite enough to understand

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 23 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

the real intention of the parties and the goals they wish to
achieve by entering into the agreement.

(c) Judicial Realism: Urgent Need to have Settlement
Agreements in Hindi

43. There is an urgent need to ensure that the agreement drafted to
settle the issues to bring an end to a future or pending lis does not itself
become a matter of dispute giving rise to another lis between the parties.
The common understanding of the parties on essential conditions for
enforceability of an agreement is crucial in a mediated settlement
agreement and expressing intentions and commitments to the agreement
through clear and concise language is critical for its effective
enforcement. But a mediator should bear in mind that the level of
understanding of the parties concerned may vary according to their
social backgrounds, and thus, the mediator should remain attentive and
alert to the circumstances, capacity, and linguistic abilities of the parties
involved, considering their backgrounds and language proficiency. Since
mediated settlement agreements are usually drafted in English, it is
important to carefully draft and ensure that the parties concerned
comprehend the agreement in vernacular language as this can
significantly impact its effectiveness and execution.

44. This Court also remains conscious of the fact that the majority of
litigants who approach this Court and the Courts below speak Hindi as
their first language. Given that Hindi is their mother tongue, they are far
more adept at speaking and understanding it than they are at other
languages such as English. However, the mediated settlement

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 24 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

agreements in Delhi are drafted only in English. In such a scenario, the
Settlement Agreement and the conditions thereof may not always be
adequately clear to the parties and at times, the translation from English
to Hindi may not convey exactly what the parties intend to do.

45. It can be noted that as per directions of the Central Government, a
Hindi Department has been constituted in every Court and Hindi
Committee is also constituted in every Court complex. The project of
translation of the judgments from English to Hindi is already
successfully working under guidance of Hon'ble Apex Court.

i. Preparation of Mediated Settlement Agreements in Hindi

46. It is, therefore, directed that concerned In-charge of Mediation
Centres will ensure that the mediated settlement agreements are
prepared in Hindi language also, in addition to English language, as
far as possible. It is being directed since in majority of cases, the parties
do not comprehend English and their spoken language and mother
tongue is Hindi. However, in cases the parties are well-versed in English
language and want the agreement to be in English language only, there
will be no such insistence or requirement.

47. This Court hopes that once the agreements are written in Hindi,
wherever required, which the parties understand and the Mediator
performs his/her duty carefully, it will ensure not only finality of
agreements in the mediation centers but also its successful culmination
in the Courts of law which is the aim and objective of mediation centers.

48. Also because the aim of mediation is to reduce or resolve
litigation and not to escalate it, it would be apt to ask both the parties to
bring their agreements in their own language even in skeletal form,

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 25 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

which can help the mediator to ensure that none of the conditions is left
out while preparing the final draft or agreement.

VI. CONCLUSION

49. While it is difficult to lay down a definitive list of factors to be
considered while drafting mediated settlement agreements, this Court
has made an effort to bring the issue to the fore and try to provide a
solution as this Court is alive to the plight of the parties where even after
ten years of having reached an agreement, they are still before the Court
where the clause vide which agreement was reached is itself under
challenge due to its ambiguity.

50. The above guidelines and directions, as enlisted in para no. 42 and
46 are in addition to the guidelines and directions contained in the
judgment of
Rajat Gupta v. Rupali Gupta
(supra) passed by Hon'ble
Division Bench of this Court in respect of the issues raised before the
Court therein.

51. Coming back to the present case, the parties to the settlement
agreement had demonstrated their intention to release one another from
all past, present and future claims and had settled all the matrimonial
disputes against each other and their families, but the petitioners herein
could not have foreseen that the complainant will use the ambiguity in
the Mediated Settlement Agreement after ten years to their detriment.
While the contextual analysis in this case indicates mutually acceptable
agreement between the parties, the Settlement Agreement reflects the
understanding of the parties towards the economic consequences and
towards attaining a finality to the lis. However, the absence of a default
clause and the conditions being written in inadequate terms have come

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 26 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

in the way of putting an end to the litigation and the misery of the
petitioners. While the petitioners herein thought that they were insulated
from any claim from the complainant or from criminal charges as the
case had been settled and the FIR was agreed to be quashed wherein
they were named, they remained unaware of the change of mind of the
complainant which happened before this Court.

52. In cases of matrimonial disputes and proceedings of divorce, both
the parties go through one of the most stressful phases of their lives. In
cases such as the present one, where the matter was settled at an early
stage and the parties were able to reach the final agreement, the mediator
should also be careful of the future consequences of the agreement that
the parties were arriving at, and the fact that fulfilment of one condition
leads to another and in matrimonial cases, fulfilment of each condition
and successful culmination and execution of such an agreement can
make or break many lives.

53. When a Court is faced with a situation as the present one, it is left
with no other option but to look at the circumstances in which the
agreement was negotiated and executed and also peruse the records to
find the original objective which the parties were seeking to achieve as
well as the original intention exhibited by subsequent substantial
compliance with the terms of the mediated settlement agreement. The
complainant, who is now seeking to persuade this Court to believe that
she had not agreed to settle the case with rest of the accused persons i.e.
petitioners herein though she has already obtained a mutual consent
divorce and has received the entire amount for quashing of the FIR, had
to bring before this Court the reasons and circumstances which reflect
that she can make significant departure from the settlement agreement

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 27 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

qua the present petitioners, and the clock cannot be put back by setting
aside the entire settlement agreement.

54. This Court, therefore, having taken a broader approach of
characterising the main issue in this case as discussed above, holds that
the agreement in the present case for quashing of the FIR was qua all
the respondents as mentioned in clause 5 of the Settlement Agreement
in question.

55. Thus, as far as the prayer in the present petition is concerned, the
same is allowed and the FIR bearing no. 519/2012, registered at Police
Station Uttam Nagar, for the offences punishable under
Sections
498A
/
/
IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom stands
quashed.

56. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of in above
terms and directions.

VII. WAY FORWARD

57. To conclude, this Court notes that the confusion that arose due to
an ambiguity in the settlement agreement and the prolonging of the
present case for ten years after having been settled underscored the
importance of laying down the above mentioned guidelines for
preparation of mediated settlement agreements. The lives of people
embroiled in matrimonial litigation are often in state of turmoil, and
thus, the mediation as a method of alternate dispute resolution has to
come to their rescue instead of further extending the state of turmoil.
Guidance needed by the mediators to draft agreements with degree
of coherence, consistency, and unambiguity will come a long way in
healing the lives of those in need of such healing by immediately

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 28 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023:DHC:3396

putting an end to a dispute and further insulating them from future
litigation. This Court by way of this judgment only aims to ensure that
challenges to such mediation agreements due to lack of clarity or
missing out on the crucial aspects of the agreement are minimized.

58. A copy of this judgment be forwarded to In-Charge, Delhi High
Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre (SAMADHAN) as well as
concerned In-charge of all the Mediation Centres in all District Courts of
Delhi, for taking note and ensuring compliance and for further
circulation among all learned mediators. A copy be also forwarded to
Director (Academics), Delhi Judicial Academy.

59. The judgment be uploaded on the website forthwith.

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
MAY 16, 2023/ns

Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 6197/2019 Page 29 of 29

Digitally Signed

By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN

Signing Date:19.05.2023

19:24:46