CRL.M.C./2351/2024 of SAGEER & ORS. Vs THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CRL.M.C. 2351/2024 SAGEER & ORS.

..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Karan Rawal, Mr.Aman Ahmad, Mr.S.D. Pathak, Mr.Ankit & Mr.Sumbul, Advs. Petitioners present in Court. Ahmad, Mr.S.D. Pathak, Mr.Ankit & Mr.Sumbul, Advs. Petitioners present in Court.

versus

THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

..... Respondents

Through: Mr.Shoaib Haider, APP.

SI Manish Tyagi, PS Govind Puri. Puri.

SI Rajendra Kumar, PS Crime Branch. Branch.

Mr.Hemant Kumar & Mr.Kunal Joshi, Adv. for R-2. Joshi, Adv. for R-2.

Respondent no.2 present in Court. Court.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

% 21.03.2024

CRL.M.A. 9012/2024 (Exemption)

1.Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 2351/2024

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. 0481/2021 registered at Police Station: Govind Puri, South-East, Delhi under Sections 498A/377/354/506/34 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.Shoaib Haider, learned APP on behalf of respondent no.1 and Respondent no.2 who is present in person.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject FIR was an offshoot of the matrimonial discord and some misunderstanding between the parties, that is, the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2. He submits that the parties have amicably settled their inter se disputes and have entered into settlement vide Memorandum of Understanding dated 13.10.2023.

6.The respondent no.2, who is present in Court and has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer (IO), she reaffirms the abovementioned settlement and states that she has settled all thedisputes with the petitioners out of her own free will and without any coercion. The respondent no.2 submits that she does not wish to pursue the proceedings emanating from the FIR any further and has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

7.The learned counsel for the petitioners has handed over Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) in cash to the respondent no.2 as per the terms of the Settlement.

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

9.Keeping in view the fact that the disputes arose between the parties out of matrimonial discord and that the respondent no.2 does not wish to pursue her complaint any further, as also the Settlement arrived at between the parties, I find that no useful purpose shall be

served in continuing with the proceedings of the present FIR as the chances of its success would be rather minuscule and it would create further acrimony between the parties and will be an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer.

10.Guided by the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in its judgments in Kapil Gupta v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1030, 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 abovementioned FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

11.Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 0481/2021 registered at Police Station: Govind Puri, South-East, Delhi under Sections 498A/377/354/506/34 of IPC, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against the petitioners are quashed.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

MARCH 21, 2024/rv/am

Click here to check corrigendum, if any