CRL.M.C./9098/2024 of LOKESH KUMAR & ORS. Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI (THROUGH SHO PS MAHENDRA PARK) & ANR.
Parties
- LOKESH KUMAR & ORS (PETITIONER)
- STATE OF NCT OF DELHI (THROUGH SHO PS MAHENDRAPARK) & ANR (RESPONDENT)
Cites (1)
- WRIT PETITION 732 of 2016 (2025)
Statutes cited (1)
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+CRL.M.C. 9098/2024
LOKESH KUMAR & ORS......PetitionersThrough:Mr. Anuj Bhardwaj, Adv.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI (THROUGH SHO PS MAHENDRAPARK) & ANR......Respondents
.....Respondents
Through:Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for Statewith Ms. Sanya Narula, Adv. and SINagendra Singh, PS Mahindra Park,Delhi.
Mr. Rahul Dhamija, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGHO R R21.11.2024
1.This is petition filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 seekingquashing of the FIR No. 157/2018 dated 16.04.2018 under Section 498A,406 and 43 of IPC registered at PS Mahindra Park.
2.The FIR was registered on account of physical and mental cruelty fordemand of dowry, threat to life, for not returning the stridhan and for non-payment of maintenance.
3.During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at asettlement dated 12.10.2023 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, NorthDistrict, Rohini, Delhi, wherein the respondents have settled their disputeswith the petitioners and have agreed to cooperate in quashing of the FIR.
4.A sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was to be paid out of which 70,000/- has
already been paid and the balance amount sum of Rs.30,000/- is paid today.
5.Petitioners are present in Court and are identified by Mr. AnujBhardwaj, leaned counsel. The respondent no.2 is present in Court and isidentified by the Mr. Rahul Dhamija, learned counsel for respondent no.2and SI Nagendra Singh, PS Mahindra Park, Delhi.
6.There is no Child out of the wedlock.
7.Since the parties have arrived at settlement and no disputes arepending, I am convinced that quashing of such proceedings on account ofcompromise would bring peace and would secure ends of justice.
8.The Court does not see any fruitful purpose if criminal proceedingsare permitted to be prosecuted any further. It is fit case for quashing. Inthis view of the matter, there is no reason to continue the proceedings.
9.Accordingly, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 157/2018 dated16.04.2018 under Section 498A, 406 and 43 of IPC registered at PSMahindra Park is quashed.
NOVEMBER 21, 2024 / (bh)
JASMEET SINGH, J
Click here to check corrigendum, if any