Delhi High Court - Orders
Manjeet & Ors vs State & Anr on 22 February, 2023
Author: Yogesh Khanna
Bench: Yogesh Khanna
$~59
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 1247/2023
MANJEET & ORS.
..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Birender Bhatt and Mr.Rakesh
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
STATE & ANR
..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the
State with SI Rajiv Ranjan, PS
Mayapuri.
Mr.Jitender Tanwar an Mr.Saurabh
Saini, Advocates with R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
ORDER
% 22.02.2023
CRL.M.A.Nos.4763-64/2023
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application(s) stand disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 1247/2023 & CRL.M.A.4846/2023
3. Petitioners file this writ petition for quashing of the FIR No.180/2017 under Section 406/498A/34 Indian Penal Code registered at police station Maya Puri, District West, Delhi against them and the proceedings emanating therefrom.
4. The marriage between the petitioner No.1 and complainant/ respondent No.2 was solemnized on 27.01.2016 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at Delhi. On 19.08.2016 a baby girl was born from the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:23.02.2023 16:27 wedlock.
5. Due to matrimonial discord, on 10.08.2017 the respondent No.2 filed a DV case against the petitioners. On 19.07.2017 the aforesaid FIR was registered on at the instance of respondent No.2.
6. However, the parties settled the dispute on 16.03.2021 before the Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. In lieu of settlement the petitioner No.1 was to pay an amount of Rs.60,000/- to respondent No.2 towards all her claim of alimony, maintenance - past, present and future, stridhan, and dowry articles etc.
7. The parties have also obtained divorce by mutual consent.
8. The complainant/respondent No.2 is present and has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer and states the matter has been settled with the petitioners and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed against the petitioners. She confirms having received Rs.40,000/- earlier and today Rs.20,000/- has been paid to her. The custody of the minor child is with the respondent No.2.
9. The learned APP for the State has also no objection, if this petition is allowed. The affidavits of parties are on record.
10. Considering the above settlement between the parties, there is no impediment in quashing of the FIR as complainant has settled all the disputes and has received the settled amount from the petitioners. In view of the above, there is no use to continue with the proceedings against petitioners as it would never entail in conviction of petitioners.
11. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Consequently, FIR No.180/2017 under Section 406/498A/34 Indian Penal Code registered at police station Maya Puri, District West, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:23.02.2023 16:27 are quashed. The above settlement would not affect the lawful rights/claims of minor child, which may be exercised, in future, against the petitioner No.1. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
FEBRUARY 22, 2023 VLD Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:23.02.2023 16:27