Delhi High Court
Lokesh Mamtani & Ors. vs State (The Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. on 15 February, 2024
Author: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
Bench: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
$~58
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 15.02.2024
+ CRL.M.C. 1239/2024
LOKESH MAMTANI & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ashish Tilwani and Mr. Chandan
Prajapati, Advocates with Petitioners
in-person.
versus
STATE (THE NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP for State with
SI Chulhan Prasad Yadav, PS: Bharat
Nagar, Delhi.
Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh, Advocate
for R-2 with R-2-in-person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
% JUDGMENT
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
1. Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
('Cr.P.C.') has been preferred on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of
FIR No. 0398/2023, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at
P.S.: Bharat Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
respondent No. 2 along with respondent No. 2 in person appear on advance
notice and accept notice.
3. In brief, as per the case of the petitioners, marriage between petitioner
No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was solemnized according to Hindu rites and
ceremonies on 28/06/2021 at Gurudwara Sri Guru Singh Sabha, Rajouri
Garden, New Delhi. No child was born out of the wedlock. Due to
temperamental differences between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2,
they started living separately since 12.12.2021. On complaint of respondent
No. 2, present FIR was registered on 18.05.2023.
4. The matter is stated to have been amicably resolved between the
parties in terms of Settlement Deed dated 13.09.2023. The marriage has been
further dissolved by decree of divorce by way of mutual consent under
Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act on 08.01.2024.
5. Balance amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- has been paid to respondent No. 2
through Demand Draft No. 515897 dated 09.02.2024 drawn on ICICI Bank,
Rajinder Nagar Branch, towards full and final settlement between the parties.
6. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement
between the parties, the State has no objection in case the FIR in question is
quashed.
7. Petitioners as well as respondent No. 2 are present in person and have
been identified by SI Chulhan Prasad Yadav, PS: Bharat Nagar, Delhi. I have
interacted with the parties and they confirm that the matter has been
amicably settled between them without any threat, pressure or coercion.
Respondent No. 2 also states that nothing remains to be further adjudicated
upon between the parties and she has no objection in case the FIR in question
is quashed.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances, since the matter has been
amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose shall be served by
keeping the case pending. It would be nothing but an abuse of the process of
Court. Consequently, FIR No. 0398/2023, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC
registered at P.S.: Bharat Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating
therefrom stand quashed.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also
stand disposed of.
A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Trial Court for
information.
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.
FEBRUARY 15, 2024/R
