Delhi High Court - Orders
Puneet Kumar And Ors vs State (Govt. Of Nct Delhi) And Anr on 7 February, 2022
Author: Mukta Gupta
Bench: Mukta Gupta
$~23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 184/2022
PUNEET KUMAR AND ORS ..... Petitioners
Represented by: Mr. P.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate.
Versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) AND ANR ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC (Crl.)
GNCTD with Ms. Jyoti Babbar,
Advocate.
SI Ashok, PS Farsh Bazar.
Mr. Naresh Gupta, Advocate for R-2
with R-2 in person through video
conferencing.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
ORDER
% 07.02.2022 The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.
W.P.(CRL) 184/2022
1. By this petition, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.149/2015 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at PS - Farsh Bazar, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No. 2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that parties have entered into a settlement.
2. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State, on instructions, submits that in the above noted FIR, the petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 were kept in Column No.11 and petitioner Nos. 4 to 6 were kept in Column No.12 were Signature Not Verified W.P. (CRL.) 184/2022 Page 1Digitally of 3 Signed MUKTA By:JUSTICE GUPTA Signing Date:07.02.2022 21:39:19 not summoned. Further, the petitioner Nos.1 to 3 were discharged and against the order of discharge, the State has filed a Revision Petition which is pending.
3. During the pendency of the said Revision Petition, parties have entered into a settlement before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi on 15th December, 2021, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-B to the present petition.
4. Respondent No. 2 is present through video conferencing and is identified by the learned counsel. She states that she has settled the matter with the petitioners. Divorce had already been granted between the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No.2. In lieu of all her claims of maintenance, stridhan, alimony etc., respondent No.2 was to receive a total sum of ₹20 lakhs, which she has already received and now she has no claim whatsoever remaining against the petitioners and does not wish to pursue the above noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. She undertakes to abide by the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties.
5. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are present through video conferencing and are identified by the learned counsel. They affirm the statement of respondent No.2 and undertake to abide by the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties.
6. In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.
Signature Not VerifiedW.P. (CRL.) 184/2022 Page 2Digitally of 3 Signed MUKTA By:JUSTICE GUPTA Signing Date:07.02.2022 21:39:19
7. Consequently, 149/2015 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at PS - Farsh Bazar, Delhi and the proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
8. Petition is disposed of.
9. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
FEBRUARY 7, 2022 PB Signature Not Verified W.P. (CRL.) 184/2022 Page 3Digitally of 3 Signed MUKTA By:JUSTICE GUPTA Signing Date:07.02.2022 21:39:19