Delhi High Court
Ravi Bhushan Sharma & Ors. vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 22 August, 2017
$~24
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 1219/2017
RAVI BHUSHAN SHARMA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Faimuddin Advocate with
Mr.Lalit Kumar Jha, Advocate along with
petitioner No.1 in person.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for the
State with ASI Vedpal, P.S. Jyoti Nagar,
Delhi.
Mr.Rajan Sharma, Advocate for R-2 along
with respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
ORDER
% 22.08.2017
VINOD GOEL, J. (ORAL)
1. Status report has been filed on behalf of the State.
2. Respondent No.2 is also present. She is being represented by
her counsel. She is duly identified by the IO ASI Vedpal.
3. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.PC')
for quashing of the FIR bearing No.70/2017, registered on
21.02.2017 with Police Station Jyoti Nagar, North East, Delhi,
under Sections 406 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act, 1961 lodged on the complaint of respondent
No.2.
4. The petitioner No.1 was engaged to marry with respondent No.2
through one mediator Jag Roshan i.e. petitioner No.6. Their
Roka ceremony was held on 11.12.2016 at Durga Mandir,
Durga Puri Chowk, Shahdara, Delhi. Subsequently, certain
differences and disputes arose between the parties due to which
engagement to marry was broken down on 19.12.2016.
5. The petitioners No.2 and 3 are the parents of petitioner No.1,
petitioners No.4 and 5 are the sisters of the petitioner No.1 and
petitioner No.6 is the mediator.
6. The respondent No.2 lodged the said FIR on 21.02.2017
subsequent to the breaking down of the engagement to marry.
7. Thereafter, the parties had on 3.4.3017 before the learned
Mediator, Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma, arrived at a
settlement by which the petitioner No.1 had agreed to return one
gold ring and one gold chain to respondent No.2 before the
concerned court on 5.4.2017.
8. Pursuant to the said settlement, the petitioner No.1 had returned
both the gold articles. Respondent No.2 present in the court
states that she had received both the gold articles from the
petitioner No.1. She submits that she does not want to pursue
the said FIR. She submits that in view of the settlement FIR
may be quashed.
9. Learned Additional Standing Counsel through the I.O. submits
that the charge sheet has not been filed.
10. The parties have amicably settled their all disputes and no
purpose would be served in further pursuing with the FIR
bearing No.70/2017, registered on 21.02.2017 with Police
Station Jyoti Nagar, North East, Delhi, under Sections 406 of
IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Hence, to secure ends of justice, the FIR bearing No.70/2017,
registered on 21.02.2017 with Police Station Jyoti Nagar, North
East, Delhi, under Sections 406 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and proceedings arising out of the
same are hereby quashed.
11. The petition is disposed of.
VINOD GOEL, J.
AUGUST 22, 2017/sandeep
