Sec 498A IPC Conviction Should Not Be Maintained When There Is A Genuine Settlement Of Matrimonial Disputes : Supreme Court

Emphasizing the duty of the Court to encourage genuine settlement of matrimonial disputes, the Supreme Court set aside conviction of a man under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC').

In this case, the husband was convicted under Section 498-A IPC and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of three years. Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal filed by him. Partly allowing the Revision Petition, the High Court of Jharkhand taking note of the settlement between the parties, confirmed the conviction under Section 498-A IPC while reducing the sentence to the period of imprisonment already undergone.

In appeal before the Apex Court, the issue raised was whether the High Court, even after taking note of the settlement of the parties resolving their marital disputes, has erred in not setting aside the order of conviction altogether?

The Apex Court bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath opined that maintaining of conviction of the appellant of the offence under Section 498-A IPC would not be securing the ends of justice. With such conviction being maintained and the appellant losing his job, the family would again land itself in financial distress which may ultimately operate adverse to the harmony and happy conjugal life of the parties, the bench said.

Before the Court, both the parties reiterated their stand that they have resolved their disputes and are living together while leading a happy conjugal life. The court, thus, observed:

"Taking note of the object of Section 498-A IPC, the expected approach of the High Court in the event of bona fide settlement of disputes had been duly exposited by this Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and Others v. State of Haryana and Another: (2003) 4 SCC 675, where this Court has underscored the duty of the Court to encourage the genuine settlement of matrimonial disputes"

The court also referred to the judgment in Bitan Sengupta & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr. : (2018) 18 SCC 366. Allowing the appeal, the bench observed:

"In the aforesaid view of the matter, and taking note of the terms of settlement as stated in the application moved before the High Court which include the undertaking of the appellant that he would be nominating the respondent No. 2 as the nominee in his service record; and where the parties are said to be leading a happy conjugal life, we are clearly of the view that the High Court should have accepted the settlement and quashed all the proceedings with annulment of the orders against the appellant. The High Court having not done so, we are inclined to adopt this course so as to secure the ends of justice."

Click here to Read/Download Order