Raju @ Raju Rajput & Ors. vs State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr.
2024 Latest Caselaw 2377 Del

Delhi High Court

Raju @ Raju Rajput & Ors. vs State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. on 19 March, 2024

Author: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta

Bench: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta

                          $~67
                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          %                                              Date of Decision: 19.03.2024
                          +      W.P.(CRL) 916/2024
                                 RAJU @ RAJU RAJPUT & ORS.                  ..... Petitioners
                                               Through: Ms.Poonam Khanna, Advocate with
                                                        Petitioners-in-person.

                                                    versus

                                 STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR.             ..... Respondents
                                               Through: Ms.Rupali Bandhyopadya, ASC (Crl),
                                                         GNCTD with Insp. Vikas Malik &
                                                         WASI Rakhi, PS Mansarovar Park.
                                                         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.

W.P.(CRL.) 916/2024

1. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with 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. 86/2023, under Sections 498A/34 IPC registered at P.S.: Mansarovar Park and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and 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 25.07.2015. A child was born out of the wedlock. Due to temperamental differences between the parties, petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 started living separately. On complaint of respondent No. 2, present FIR was registered on 04.04.2023.

4. The disputes are stated to have been amicably resolved between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 with the intervention of family members, in terms of Settlement Deed dated 10.11.2023 and they have been thereafter living together.

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 WASI Rakhi, P.S.: Mansarovar Park. 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. 86/2023, under Sections 498A/34 IPC registered at P.S.: Mansarovar Park 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.

MARCH 19, 2024/v