CRL.M.C./9992/2024 of MOHD. JAVED Vs THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CRL.M.C. 9992/2024

MOHD. JAVED .....Petitioner Through: Mr Raj Kumar and Ms Saira Parveen, Advs. Through: Mr Raj Kumar and Ms Saira Parveen, Advs.

versus

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

.....Respondents

Through: Mr Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for State. SI Arvind Verma, PS-Gokalpuri

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R R% 19.12.2024

CRL.M.A. 38306/2024

1.Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 9992/2024

3.This is petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 0599/2017, under –Sections 354/354-A/506 IPC, registered at Police Station Gokul Puri, Delhi and consequential proceedings, if any, emanating therefrom.

4.As per the FIR, there are allegations of outraging the modesty of the respondent No.2 by the petitioner who is her brother-in-law.

5.Petitioner is present in Court and has been identified by his counsel, Mr Raj Kumar.

6.Respondent No. 2 is also present in Court and has been identified by the Investigating Officer SI Arvind Verma, PS-Gokalpuri.

7.It is submitted that the parties have settled their disputes before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma, Delhi wherein the petitioner had to

pay sum of Rs. 6 lakhs to respondent No.2, out of which Rs. 3,50,000/- has already been and the balance sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- has been paid today in Court vide demand draft bearing DD No. 060917 dated 29.10.2024 drawn on Punjab National Bank. It is stated that the petitioner No.3 and the complainant have already been divorced by decree of divorce.

8.Both the parties state that they have entered into the aforesaid settlement out of their own free will, volition and without any threat, force, undue influence or coercion. It is stated by respondent No.2 that she has no objection if the FIR is quashed.

9.There is one child born from the wedlock, who is in the care and custody of respondent No.2/mother. It is directed that in view of the judgment Ganesh v. Sudhir Kumar Shrivastava [(2020) 20 SCC 787], the settlement executed between the petitioners and respondent No. 2, and this order shall have no effect on the rights of child of the parties, who shall be free to avail all legal rights and remedies towards inheritance, maintenance, education, marriage expenses etc. against either of her parents.

10.It seems that the allegations in the FIR is predicated on matrimonial issue which the respondent No.2/complainant had with her husband and they are already divorced as per Muslim Law.

11.Since the parties have arrived at settlement and no disputes are pending, I am convinced that quashing of such proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and would secure ends of justice. The Court does not see any fruitful purpose if criminal proceedings are permitted to be prosecuted any further. It is fit case for quashing. In this view of the matter, there is no reason to continue the proceedings.

12.In this view of the matter, FIR No. 0599/2017, under Sections

–354/354-A/506 IPC, registered at Police Station Gokul Puri, Delhi and consequential proceedings, if any, emanating therefrom, if any, are hereby quashed.

13.The petition is disposed of accordingly.

DECEMBER 19, 2024 sr

JASMEET SINGH, J

Click here to check corrigendum, if any