Delhi High Court
Tejasswi Sharrma & Ors vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 8 May, 2025
$~107
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 08.05.2025
+ CRL.M.C. 2467/2025
TEJASSWI SHARRMA AND ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Adv.
Petitioners in person.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ... Respondents
Through: Mr.Hitesh Vali, APP for the
State with SI Jyoti.
Advocate for respondent no.2
(appearance not given)
R-2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
JUDGMENT(ORAL)
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
CRL.M.A. 11052/2025 EXEMPTION
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
1. This petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 seeks quashing of FIR No. 0123/2021 dated 02.04.2021
under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC, P.S. Hari Nagar, Delhi, and all
proceedings arising therefrom pursuant to a settlement between the parties.
2. The marriage between Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.2was
solemnized on 18.04.2019 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies at Delhi. No
child was born out of the said wedlock. It is submitted that due to
temperamental differences, the couple started living separately since
20.02.2020. Thereafter, Respondent No.2 lodged the aforesaid FIR against
Petitioner No. 1 and his family members.On 01.12.2022, the chargesheet
was filed. On 02.05.2024, charges were framed against Petitioner No. 1
under Sections 377 and 498A read with Section 34 IPC, against Petitioner
No. 2 under Section 498A read with Section 34 IPC, and against Petitioner
No. 3 under Sections 406 and 498A read with Section 34 IPC.
3. During the pendency of the proceedings, both parties entered into a
Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 21.12.2024. In pursuance of the
settlement, the first motion petition, HMA No. 08/2025, filed under Section
13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, was allowed on 10.01.2025. The
Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, West, Tis Hazari Court, vide HMA
No. 406/2025, allowed the second motion petition under Section 13B(2) on
25.02.2025, thereby dissolving the marriage between Petitioner No. 1 and
Respondent No. 2. The Petitioner agreed to pay a total sum of Rs.
10,00,000/- to Respondent No. 2 in phased payments. A copy of the
Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 21.12.2024 has been placed on record
as Annexure P-2.
4. The matter was placed before the Joint Registrar on 01.05.2025, who
has recorded the statements of both the parties and passed the following
orders:-
"01.05.2025
Today, videoconferencing is not connected due to some
technical error. Complaint in this regard made to the
concerned branch.
Today, statement of respondent no.2 and petitioner no. 1 have
been recorded to ascertain the veracity and the genuineness of
the parties entering into settlement. Respondent no.2 and the
petitioner no.1 have been identified by the learned counsel
and the IO.
This pre verified report along with the petition may be placed
before the Hon'ble Court on 8th May 2025."
5. Parties are present in person along with their counsels. They have
been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating
Officer SI Jyoti from PS Hari Nagar.
6. Respondent No. 2 confirms that she has received the full and final
settlement amount and submits that the matter has been amicably settled
with the Petitioners without any force, fear, or coercion. She has no
objection to the terms and conditions mentioned in the
Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 21.12.2024 and further submits that
she has no objection if FIR No. 0123/2021, along with all pending
proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed against the Petitioners.
7. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Additional PP
appearing for the State, also has no objection if the present FIR
0123/2021,alongwith pending proceedings, is quashed.
8. In Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon'ble
Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes
by observing as under:-
"61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it
would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to
continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of
criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of
law despite settlement and compromise between the victim
and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice,
it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the
answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High
Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the
criminal proceedings."
9. In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the fact that parties have
put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing
with the present FIR No. 0123/2021 dated 02.04.2021 under Sections 498-
A/406/34 IPC, P.S. Hari Nagar, Delhi and all the other consequential
proceeding emanating therefrom.
10. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and FIR No.
0123/2021 dated 02.04.2021 under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC, P.S. Hari
Nagar, Delhi, along with the charge sheet and all the other consequential
proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.
11. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
12. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
MAY 08, 2025/na
