Delhi High Court
Sahil Gulati & Ors. vs State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. on 20 March, 2024
Author: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
Bench: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
$~63
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 20.03.2024
+ CRL. M.C. 2277/2024
SAHIL GULATI & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.P.K.Shrivastava, Advocate
alongwith petitioners in person.
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .... Respondents
Through: Ms.Kiran Bairwa, APP with SI Ravi
Narwal, PS Moti Nagar.
Mr.Gurjas Singh Narula, Advocate
alongwith respondent No.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. 402/2018, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at
P.S.: Moti Nagar and proceedings emanating therefrom. Section 354A IPC
has been subsequently invoked by the prosecution.
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 19.04.2018. No child was born out of the wedlock. Due to
temperamental differences, respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 started
living separately since 21.05.2018. Present FIR was registered on the
complaint of respondent No. 2, on 29.10.2018.
4. The disputes are stated have been amicably settled between the parties
vide Settlement Deed dated 29.08.2022. 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 27.09.2023.
5. An amount of Rs. 25,000/- has been paid to respondent No.2 today
through DD No.756086 dated 24.01.2024 drawn on Union Bank of India,
Paschim Vihar A Block Branch in favour of respondent No.2 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 in person have been identified
by SI Ravi Narwal, P.S.: Moti Nagar. 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. 402/2018, under Sections 498A/406/34 &
354A IPC registered at P.S.: Moti Nagar and the proceedings emanating
therefrom stand quashed.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also
stand disposed of.
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.
MARCH 20, 2024/v
