Delhi High Court
Anil Kumar & Ors vs The State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 14 May, 2025
$~93
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 14.05.2025
+ CRL.M.C. 2087/2025 & CRL M.A 9377/2025 EXEMPTION
ANIL KUMAR AND ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Varun Thakur, Adv. along
with petitioners in person.
versus
THE STATE & ANR. ... Respondents
Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the
State with SI Deepak Sahu, PS
Punjabi Bagh.
Mr. Raj Kumar, Mr. Atul Singh
Rawat & Mr. Sancheet Sharma,
Advs. for R-2 with R-2 in
person.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
JUDGMENT(ORAL)
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
1. This petition under Section 528 of the
BharatiyaNagarikSurakshaSanhita, 2023 seeks quashing of FIR No.
370/2013 dated 05.09.2013 under Sections 328/506/34 IPC, P.S.
Punjabi Bagh, Delhi, and all proceedings arising therefrom pursuant to
a settlement between the parties.
2. Respondent no. 2 married the petitioner's daughter after she
converted to Islam. He alleged that on being invited to the petitioner's
home on 24.10.2012, he was mentally harassed, which led to his
hospitalization. He further claimed coercion and threats by the
petitioner's family, resulting in registration of FIR under Sections 328,
506, and 34 IPC.
3. During the proceedings, both parties entered into a
Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 10.03.2024. The
Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 10.03.2024 is annexed as
Annexure-E.
4. Petitioners & respondent no.2 are physically present before the
Court with respective Counsels. They have been identified by their
respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Deepak
Sahu from PS Punjabi Bagh.
5. Respondent No. 2 submits that the matter has been amicably
settled with the Petitioners without any force, fear, or coercion. He has
no objection to the terms and conditions mentioned in the
Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 10.03.2024 and further submits
that he has no objection if FIR No. 370/2013 dated 05.09.2013 under
Sections 328/506/34 IPC, P.S. Punjabi Bagh, Delhi, along with all
pending proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed against the
Petitioners. He further states that FIR No. 144/2013 under Section
498A/34 IPC, PS Shakarpur registered against him at the instance of
daughter of the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 has since been quashed vide
order dated 20.05.2015.
6. Ld. APP opposes the petition stating that offence alleged is of
serious nature.
7. 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."
8. FIR is of the year 2013, but till date charges have not been
framed. 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. 370/2013 dated 05.09.2013 under
Sections 328/506/34 IPC, P.S. Punjabi Bagh, Delhi and all the other
consequential proceeding emanating therefrom.
9. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and FIR No.
370/2013 dated 05.09.2013 under Sections 328/506/34 IPC, P.S.
Punjabi Bagh, Delhi, along with the all the other consequential
proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed, subject to cost of
Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Delhi High Court
Legal Services Committee within a period of 15 days.
10. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
11. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
MAY 14, 2025/na
