Delhi High Court
Rajeev Kumar Maggo & Ors. vs State & Anr. on 24 February, 2021
$~13 & 21
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: February 24, 2021
+ CRL.M.C. 591/2021 & Crl.M.A. 2970/2021
RAJAT SETHI & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Advocate (Appearance not
given)
Versus
THE STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmed, Additional
Public Prosecutor for
respondent No.1/ State with
SI Raj Kumar
Mr. R S Goswami &
Mr.Varun Mittal, Advocates
with respondent No.2/Surbhi
Magoo
+ CRL.M.C. 613/2021 & Crl.M.A. 3029-30/2021
RAJEEV KUMAR MAGGO & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. R S Goswami &
Mr.Varun Mittal, Advocates
Versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmed, Additional
Public Prosecutor for
respondent No.1/ Statewith SI
Raj Kumar
Respondent No.2/Promila
Sethi
Crl.M.C. 591/2021 & Crl.M.C. 613/2021 Page 1 of 5
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
%
The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
1. In the above captioned first petition [Crl.M.C. 591/2021],
quashing of FIR No. 270/2019, under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC,
registered at police station North Rohini, Delhi is sought. In the
above captioned second petition [Crl.M.C. 613/2021], quashing of
FIR No. 122/2019, under Sections 323/354B/341/506/509/34 IPC,
registered at police station Rajouri Garden, New Delhi, is sought.
2. Petitioner No.1 in the first captioned petition [Crl.M.C.
591/2021] is the husband, petitioner No.2 & 3 are the parents in
laws and petitioner No.4 is the brother-in-law of respondent
No.2/wife, who is the complainant of FIR No. 270/2019. The basis
of this FIR is matrimonial dispute between petitioner No.1/husband
and respondent No2/wife.
3. The matrimonial dispute resulted in registration of cross FIR
bearing No. 122/2019 at police station Rajouri Garden, at the
instance of mother of husband against the parents and family
members of wife. In the above captioned second petition [Crl.M.C.
613/2021] quashing of the said FIR is sought by the parents and
family members of wife.
4. Notice issued.
5. Mr. Izhar Ahmed, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
State, accepts notice of both the petitions and submit that
complainants of both the FIR are present through video
conferencing. He submits that complainants of both the FIRs are
present through video conferencing and they have been recognized
by SI Raj Kumar, Investigating Officer of these FIRs.
6. With the consent of both the sides, these petitions have been
taken up together for final hearing and disposal.
7. The marriage between Mr.Rajat Sethi and Ms. Surbhi Magoo
was solemnized on 25.11.2016 and due to temporal differences, the
marriage could not work and they started living separately since
21.02.2018. The dispute between the parties culminated into the
FIRs in question.
8. These petitions have been filed on the ground that the parties
have amicably settled their dispute in terms of Compromise-Cum-
Settlement Deed dated 24.11.2020. It is stated that joint petition
under Section 13 (1) (ia) and Section 13 B(2) under the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 has been allowed by the learned Principal
Judge, Family Court, Rohini Courts, Delhi and decree of divorce has
been granted on 27.01.2021.
9. It is submitted on behalf of the parties that the terms of
Compromise-Cum-Settlement Deed dated 24.11.2020 have been
fully acted upon and no grievance survives between the parties and
therefore, proceedings arising out of FIRs in question be brought to
an end.
10. The complainants of FIRs in question affirm the factum of
settlement and they also affirm contents of their affidavits placed on
record in support of these petitions.
11. Keeping in view that the dispute between the parties has been
amicably resolved, this Court is inclined to quash the FIRs in
question, as no useful purpose would be served in continuing with
the proceedings arising out of these FIRs.
12. For the reasons afore noted, FIR No. 270/2019, registered at
police station North Rohini, Delhi as well as FIR No. 122/2019,
registered at police station Rajouri Garden, New Delhi, and
consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.
13. The petitions are accordingly allowed and disposed of.
14. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 24, 2021
r
