Delhi High Court
Sandeep Nandlal & Ors. vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 12 January, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: January 12, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 80/2015
SANDEEP NANDAL & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Rakesh Beniwal, Advocate
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent No.1-
State with SI K.P. Singh
Respondent No.2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 307/2013, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC registered at police station S.P. Badli, Delhi is sought on the basis of
mediated settlement of 16th September, 2013 (Annexure-28) reached
between the parties through Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini Courts,
Delhi and the fact that petitioner-husband and respondent No.2-wife are
living together happily since 18th September, 2013.
Notice.
Ms. Nishi Jain, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent-State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present
in the Court, is complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and she
Crl. M.C. No. 80/2015 Page 1
has been identified to be so by SI K.P. Singh, Investigating Officer of this
case.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid settlement
and terms thereof have been fully acted upon and that she is happily
living with petitioner-husband since 18th September, 2013. Respondent
No.2 affirms the contents of aforesaid settlement and of her affidavit of
16th July, 2014 supporting this petition and submits that now no dispute
with petitioners survives and to restore cordiality between the parties,
proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end.
In „Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab‟ (2012) 10 SCC 303, Apex
Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases
like the instant one, by observing as under:-
"Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise
between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the
immediate and prompt attention of a court which should
endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such
compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or
would promote savagery.
Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding
having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender
and the victim has been settled although the offences are not
compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of
criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice
in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put
to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice
Crl. M.C. No. 80/2015 Page 2
being the ultimate guiding factor."
Since the subject matter of this FIR is essentially matrimonial,
which now stands mutually and amicably settled between parties,
therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question
would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 307/2013, under
Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC registered at police station S.P. Badli,
Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed qua
petitioners. However, it is made clear that if the marriage of respondent
No.2 with petitioner-husband again runs into rough weather, then this
order will not stand in her way to have recourse to law.
With aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 12, 2015
r
Crl. M.C. No. 80/2015 Page 3
