The Delhi High Court has refused to quash an FIR for dowry death on the basis of a settlement between a man and his deceased wife's family, saying that it is a grave and heinous offence which is actuated by a social evil and thus needs deterrence.
Justice Mukta Gupta, while dismissing the petition by the man and other accused family members for quashing of the FIR, said that the offence of dowry death is an offence against the society and noted that the Supreme Court has ruled that cases of serious cannot be closed on the basis of a compromise.
"In the present case a woman has committed suicide within five months of the marriage due to the harassment caused by the husband and his family members and the offence punishable under Section 304-B (dowry death) IPC is not only a grave and heinous offence but an offence against the society actuated by the social evil of demand of dowry, thus needs deterrence and, therefore, cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement arrived at between the accused and the complainant," the court said in a recently passed order. "A three-judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court... Has clearly laid down that where serious and grave offences are involved, the quashing of FIR cannot be allowed on the basis of the compromise," it added. In the present case, the woman's family alleged that after the marriage in March 2021, the petitioners started harassing her for dowry. Subsequently, in August, the family received a phone call that their daughter committed suicide. During the pendency of the investigation, the petitioners and the woman's family entered into a memorandum of understanding which said that they had arrived at a settlement without any coercion and without any transfer of money. The woman's family, in the settlement, said that they had no claim and grievance against the petitioners and would cooperate in the quashing petition while making sincere efforts in getting the petitioners released on bail. The petitioners argued before the high court that in view of the settlement, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the FIR and the consequent criminal proceedings against them. The prosecution told the court that it has already filed a charge sheet against certain petitioners.
