Delhi High Court quashes two matrimonial FIRs against lawyer but asks him to do 10 cases pro bono

The Delhi High Court has ordered a lawyer to take up ten pro bono cases, while quashing two matrimonial dispute-related cases lodged against him by his wife in 2020. [X vs Government of NCT Of Delhi & Anr] .Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma quashed the two first information reports (FIRs) against the lawyer after taking into account the settlement reached between by the couple. While one FIR accused the lawyer of harassment, cruelty, and dowry demand, the other case accused him of touching the private parts of their daughter.Under the settlement, the husband gave talaq to the wife and the parties agreed to withdraw all the pending litigations. The lawyer’s former wife told the Court that the FIR under Section 354 (assault of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 10 (aggravated sexual assault) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) was registered on account of misunderstanding..Taking note of the growing tendency to level such grave allegations to win matrimonial disputes, the Court said that it strongly deprecates the practice of using children as “an instrument” to harass or intimidate the other party.However, the bench added that courts have to adopt a pragmatic approach to prevent the abuse of the process. The judge proceeded to observe that the chances of conviction in the cases before it were bleak as the complainant no longer wanted to pursue the complaints."In the present case, admittedly the dispute arose due to matrimonial discord between the parties. The petitioner is stated to have clear past antecedents. The FIR lodged under provisions of POCSO have admittedly been lodged owing to misunderstandings between the parties," the Court said..Accordingly, it quashed the FIRs. However, the Court also ordered the lawyer (petitioner) to take up ten pro bono cases as a parting condition.“Since such cases place a burden on the criminal justice system, the petitioner … who is a lawyer by profession is directed to do ten Pro bono cases," the Court directed. .The Court has requested the Delhi Legal Service Committee to assign ten cases to the lawyer. It also directed that a compliance report be filed within a month..Advocate DK Srivastava represented the petitioner. Additional Standing Counsel Rupali Bandhopadhyay and Additional Public Prosecutor Amit Sahni represented the State. Advocate Anil Basoya represented the complainant.[Read Judgment]