Delhi High Court
Mahender And Ors vs State Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 27 September, 2024
Author: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
Bench: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
$~44
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 27.09.2024
+ CRL.M.C. 4532/2024 & CRL.M.A. 17088/2024
MAHENDER & ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Petitioner No.1 to 3 through VC.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP, APP for
State with SI Rajesh Kumar, P.S.
Vijay Vihar.
Ms.(appearance not given), Advocate
with 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 petitioners for quashing of FIR
No.444/2011, under Sections 498A/406 IPC registered at P.S.: Vijay Vihar
and proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. 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 06.06.2009. Two children were born out of the wedlock who
are presently in custody of respondent No.2. 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 12.11.2011.
3. The disputes are stated to have been amicably settled between the
parties in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 24.04.2023. 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 08.11.2023.
4. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement
between the parties, she has no objection in case the FIR in question is
quashed.
5. Petitioner No.1 to 3 and respondent No. 2 through VC have been
identified by SI Rajesh Kumar PS: Vijay Vihar. Presence of petitioner No.4
to 7 is exempted. 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.
6. 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.444/2011, under Sections
498A/406 IPC registered at P.S.: Vijay Vihar 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/v
