Delhi High Court
Danish & Ors. vs The State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 27 September, 2024
Author: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
Bench: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
$~89
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 27.09.2024
+ CRL.M.C. 7698/2024 & CRL.M.A. 29366/2024
DANISH & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr.Mutuir Rehman, Ms. Shaheen, Ms.
Mehwish Khanam, Ms. Arshi, Mr.
Mohd. Salman Saifi, Mr. Hasim Khan,
Mr. Mohd. Arshad Zahiri, Mr.
Shoobhankar Sagar, Ms. Garima,
Advocates.
versus
THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP for the
State with SI Rajnandini, PS: Hauz
Qazi.
Mr. Asif Ahmed, Advocate for R-2
with R-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 petitioners for quashing of FIR
No.0081/2011, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered at P.S.: Hauz
Qazi 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 Muslim Rites and
Customs on 06.12.2009. A male child was born out of the wedlock who is
presently in custody of petitioner no. 1. Due to matrimonial differences,
petitioner No.1 and respondent No. 2 started living separately. On complaint
of respondent No. 2, present FIR was registered on 18.10.2011.
4. The disputes are stated to have been amicably settled between the
parties in terms of Settlement Deed dated 03.11.2011 arrived at Delhi
Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Learned counsel for petitioner
No.1 informs that petitioner No.1 divorced respondent No.2, in accordance
with Muslim Law in 2012.
5. An amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been paid to respondent No. 2 in cash,
since learned counsel for petitioners submits that respondent No.2 does not
have a bank account.
6. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement
between the parties, he has no objection in case the FIR in question is
quashed.
7. Petitioners and respondent No. 2 are present in person and have been
identified by SI Rajnandini, PS: Hauz Qazi. 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. The chances of conviction are bleak in view of amicable settlement
between the parties. Consequently, FIR No.0081/2011, under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC, registered at P.S.: Hauz Qazi and 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 learned Trial Court for
information.
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J
SEPTEMBER 27, 2024/g
