CRL.M.C./8855/2024 of AMARNATH KUMAR MEHTO & ORS. Vs THE STATE(GOVT OF N.C.T..OF DELHI) & ANR.

Court: Delhi High Court
Decision date: 2024-12-03
Bench: THIS IS A DIGITALLY SIGNED
Case number: 8855/2024

Parties

AMARNATH KUMAR MEHTO & ORS (PETITIONER)
THE STATE(GOVT OF N.C.T..OF DELHI) & ANR (RESPONDENT)

Cites (1)

CRL.L.P./602/2022 of MS SACHDEVA ENTERPRISES Vs THE STATE AND ANR (2025)

Statutes cited (1)

indian penal code (1860)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+CRL.M.C. 8855/2024

AMARNATH KUMAR MEHTO & ORS.

.....Petitioners

Through:Mr. Raju Chetri, Adv.

versus

THE STATE(GOVT OF N.C.T..OF DELHI) & ANR......Respondents

Through:Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP withSI Kushum, SI Brajesh Patel, PSNarainaMr. Anil Kumar Yadav, Adv.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R R%03.12.2024

CRL.M.A. 33880/2024

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application is disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 8855/2024

1.This is petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 165/2016 dated06.06.2016 u/s 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Naraina.

2.As per the FIR, there are allegations of cruelty, harassment anddemand of dowry.

3.During the pendency of proceedings, the parties have arrived at asettlement dated 14.02.2020, wherein Rs. 7 lakhs is to be paid to respondentNo. 2. Rs. 6,90,000/- has already been paid to respondent No. 2 and Rs.10,000/- is paid today.

4.Petitioner is present in Court and is identified by Mr. Raju Chetri,

Adv. Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and is identified by Mr. AnilKumar Yadav, Adv. and SI Kushum, PS Naraina.

5.There is no child borne out of the wedlock.

6.Parties state that they have arrived at the settlement out of their ownfree will without any threat, pressure, coercion or undue influence.

7.I am of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served inprosecuting the FIR any further on the ground that the parties have arrived ata voluntary settlement and settled their disputes.

8.I am convinced that quashing of such proceedings on account ofcompromise would bring about peace and would secure ends of justice. TheCourt does not see any fruitful purpose if criminal proceedings as permittedto continue any further. It is fit case for quashing. In this view of thematter, there is no reason to continue the proceedings.

9.In view of the aforesaid, FIR No. 165/2016 dated 06.06.2016 u/s498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Naraina and consequential proceedingsemanating therefrom are hereby quashed.

10.The petition is disposed of.

DECEMBER 3, 2024/DM

JASMEET SINGH, J

Click here to check corrigendum, if any