Allegation Under Sections 69 & 351 BNS Are Serious; Delhi High Court Imposes Cost Of Rs. 20K On Woman Admitting Misunderstanding In 15-Years Long Relationship
The Delhi High Court dealt with a Writ petition seeking quashing of FIR as the woman admits that there was misunderstanding between her and the man, her longstanding Live-in partner.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court imposed a cost of Rs 20,000 on the woman-complainant for initiating criminal proceedings which she admitted were based on a misunderstanding and for setting the criminal law machinery in motion despite having voluntarily been in a relationship with the petitioner.
The Writ Petition was filed to quash the FIR filed for the commission of offence punishable under Section 69/351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
The Bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma observed, “While this explanation has been duly noted, it is equally important to emphasise that the lodging of a complaint under Sections 69 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023, involving serious allegations of physical assault and wrongful restraint, cannot be permitted to be filed in a casual or reckless manner. Such allegations carry grave consequences and impact not only the accused but also the administration of justice.”
Advocate Javed Ahmad represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Anand V Khatri represented the Respondents.
Case Brief
It was the case of the parties that they had been in a close relationship for the past 15 years and had started residing together in a live-in relationship since 2019. During the course of their relationship, the man had repeatedly assured the woman that he would marry her upon the finalisation of his divorce from his legally wedded wife. Relying upon these assurances, the woman continued to cohabit with the man.
The Contention of the man was that the FIR has arisen out of a personal and private dispute between parties as there was a misunderstanding and certain emotional and medical difficulties faced by the woman at the relevant time. It is further submitted that the matter has now been amicably resolved between the parties and the woman does not wish to pursue the case any further.
Court’s Analysis
The Court noted that the complainant has candidly stated that the present complaint was lodged at a time when she was undergoing certain medical and emotional challenges, however, emphasised that the lodging of a complaint under Sections 69 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023, involving serious allegations of physical assault and wrongful restraint, cannot be permitted to be filed in a casual or reckless manner
“In such circumstances, the continuation of criminal proceedings, despite the unwillingness of the complainant to pursue them and the subsequent settlement between the parties, would serve no useful purpose and would rather amount to an abuse of the process of law”, the Court said.
The Court observed that that the process of law cannot be invoked casually or without due consideration.
“Accordingly, while the FIR is ordered to be quashed in view of the settlement and the statement of the complainant, a cost of ₹20,000/- is imposed upon the complainant for initiating criminal proceedings which she now admits were based on a misunderstanding and for setting the criminal law machinery in motion despite having voluntarily been in a relationship with the petitioner”, the Court added.
Accordingly, the FIR was quashed.
Cause Title: Anil Verma V. The State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:5602)
Appearance
Petitioner: Mr. Javed Ahmad with Ms. Monika, Advocates along with petitioner in person.
Respondent: Mr. Anand V Khatri, ASC (Crl) for State. Ms. Aakriti Aditya, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 and Respondent No. 2 in person.
