Delhi High Court
Vinay Nirwan & Ors. vs The State (Gnct Of Delhi) Through Sho, ... on 19 February, 2024
Author: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
Bench: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
$~55
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 19.02.2024
+ CRL.M.C. 1323/2024
VINAY NIRWAN & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Pankaj Rai and Mr.Sanjay Sharma,
Advocates alongwith petitioners in
person.
versus
THE STATE (GNCT OF DELHI)
THROUGH SHO, P.S. KALKAJI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP for the State
with SI Mahesh Kumar, PS Kalkaji.
Mr.B.B.Pradhan, Mr.Saurav Padhi and
Mr.Kishor Kumar, Advocates
alongwith respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
% JUDGMENT
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
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. 0561/2021, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at P.S.:
Kalkaji and proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
respondent No.2 alongwith 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 10.02.2019. No child was born out of the wedlock. Due to
temperamental differences, respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 started
living separately since 19.05.2020. Present FIR was lodged on the complaint
of respondent No. 2 on 11.08.2021.
4. The matter has been amicably resolved between the parties vide
Settlement Agreement dated 06.05.2023 arrived at Mediation Centre, Saket
Courts, New Delhi. The marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent
No. 2 has been dissolved by decree of divorce by way of mutual consent
under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act vide judgment dated
12.10.2023. An amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- out of total settlement amount of
Rs.10,00,000/- has been paid today to respondent No. 2 through Cheque
No.000792 dated 17.02.2024 drawn on HDFC Bank in favour of respondent
No. 2.
5. 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.
6. Petitioners as well as respondent No. 2 are present in person and have
been identified by SI Mahesh Kumar, PS: Kalkaji. 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.
7. 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. 0561/2021, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC
registered at P.S.: Kalkaji and the proceedings emanating therefrom stand
quashed.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending application, if any, also
stands disposed of.
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.
FEBRUARY 19, 2024/v
