CRL.M.C./2303/2024 of SHRI DEEPAK KOCHAR & ORS. Vs THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CRL.M.C. 2303/2024 SHRI DEEPAK KOCHAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Pramod Singh and Mr.Mahraj Tyagi, Advs.

versus

THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

..... Respondents Through: Mr.Satinder Singh Bawa, APP with SI Sunita and ASI Sudhakar Mr.S.S. Kalra and Mr.G.K. Kalra, Advs. for Complainant/R-2 along with R-2 in person.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLAO R R% 20.03.2024

CRL.M.A. 8884/2024 (Exemption)

1.Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 2303/2024

2.This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) seeking quashing of FIR No.162/2019 registered at Police Station: Shahdara, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, ‘IPC’), along with all other proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of settlement.

3.Issue notice.

4.Notice is accepted by Mr.Satinder Singh Bawa, learned APP for the respondent no.1 and by Mr.S.S. Kalra, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the subject FIR was an offshoot of the matrimonial discord between the parties, that is, the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2.

6.The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties, that is, petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 have amicably settled all their inter se disputes before Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi vide Mediation Settlement dated 16.05.2023.

7.Pursuant to the above settlement, the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2, have also obtained Decree of Divorce dated 21.09.2023 by the learned Family Court, by which they have decided to part their ways by mutual consent.

8.The learned counsel for the petitioners has handed over demand draft of sum of Rs.2,50,000/- to the respondent no.2, who is present in person and has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer (IO). The respondent no.2 affirms that she has settled all the disputes with the petitioners out of her own free will and without any coercion. The respondent no.2 submits that she has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

9.I have perused the contents of the FIR and also the settlement between the parties.

10.As the disputes between the parties arose out of matrimonial relationship, and now the same have been amicably settled, and the

petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 have obtained Decree of Divorce pursuant to the settlement, and also looking into the nature of the allegations made in the complaint, in my opinion, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the FIR alive. In fact, it would rather create further acrimony between the parties and will be an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer.

11.Guided by the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in its judgments in Jitendra Raghuvanshi v. Babita Raghuvanshi, (2013) 4 SCC 58; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinbhai Karmur & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Ors., (2017) 9 SCC 641; and, State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Ors., 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, this Court deems it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

12.Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No.162/2019 registered at Police Station: Shahdara, Delhi under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against the petitioners are quashed.

MARCH 20, 2024/ns/am

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

Click here to check corrigendum, if any