W.P.(CRL)/1962/2025 of AMIT GUPTA AND ORS Vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1962/2025

AMIT GUPTA AND ORS.

.....Petitioners

Through: Mr. Durgesh Kumar Pandey and Ms. Ritika Davis Franklin, Advocates Ms. Ritika Davis Franklin, Advocates

versus

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR .....Respondents

Through: Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for the State with Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate. State with Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate.

Respondent no. 2-in-person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

O R R% 02.07.2025

CRL.M.A. 18357/2025. (exemption)

1.Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 1962/2025

3.By way of the present petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing of FIR bearing no.335/2024, registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter ‘IPC’).

4.Issue notice. The learned ASC accepts notice on behalf of the State.

5.All the petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel and Investigating Officer (IO) from Police Station

Sangam Vihar, Delhi.

6.Brief facts of the present case are that petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 got married on 23.05.2021 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at Delhi. One child namely Yashvi was born on 06.08.2022 out of the said wedlock. Due to temperamental differences, parties started living separately since 22.12.2021. It is stated that on the complaint of respondent no. 2, an FIR bearing no. 335/2024 was registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC against the petitioners. During pendency of the case, both the parties had amicably settled their disputes vide Settlement Deed/Compromise Deed dated 28.08.2024.

7.On query made by this Court, respondent no.2 who has been identified by the IO, has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise out of her own free will and without any pressure, coercion or threat. It is also stated by respondent no.2 that the entire dispute has been amicably settled between them vide Settlement Deed/Compromise Deed dated 28.08.2024. Respondent no. 2 further states that she understands that the quashing is to take place today and the remaining amount of Rs. 2,15,000/- will be paid to her after Second Motion of divorce petition.

8.The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the affidavits showing the protection of interest of minor child as per the judgment titled as Ganesh vs. Sudhirkumar Shrivastava: (2020) 20 SCC 787 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court have been filed and the same are on record. The petitioner no. 1 herein states that he has signed the compromised deed having understood that he has no visitation right.

9.In view of the above fact that the parties have amicably resolved their

differences of their own free will, and without any coercion, no useful purpose will be served by continuing the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them. It would thus be in interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

10.Accordingly, FIR bearing no.335/2024, registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. 11.In view of above, the present petition stands disposed of.

12.The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.

JULY 02, 2025/zp

DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J

Click here to check corrigendum, if any