Mr.Sunil Jain & ORS. v. State & ANR.

$~17 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 292/2020 MR.SUNIL JAIN & ORS.

..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Ratneshwar Kumar, Adv.

Petitioners in person.

versus STATE & ANR.

..... Respondent Through:

Ms.

Rajni Gupta, APP for Mr.

M.S.Oberoi, APP for the State.

SI Upendra Kumar, P.S.GTB Nagar.

R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR

O R D E R

% 28.02.2020 Crl. M.A.No. 1240-41/2020 Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 292/2020 1.

This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.100/2010, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC & Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station-Mansarovar Park, Delhi, and all proceedings emanating therefrom.

2.

Issue notice.

Learned counsel for the State, who appears on advance notice, accepts notice. Respondent No.2 appears and accepts notice.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 got married on 14.05.2007 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies and they lived together as wife and husband with each other. Out of the said wedlock one female child was born. After the marriage, some disputes and differences arose between them. On 28.4.2010, the respondent No.2 got the above said FIR registered against the petitioners for causing cruelties and demand of dowry. 4.

Counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the trial, the parties have settled the matter amicably in terms of the Agreement/Settlement Deed. Copy of the same is placed on record. Accordingly, the marriage of the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 has already been dissolved by decree of divorce with mutual consent of the parties vide order dated 18.7.2013 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Courts, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. Copy of the decree of divorce is placed on record.

5.

Respondent No.2 is present in Court today and she has been identified by the IO. The respondent No.2 admits that she has settled the matter amicably with the petitioners. She further submits that the settlement/compromise has taken place voluntarily, without any force, pressure or coercion. As per settlement, Rs. 50,000/-in cash has been handed over to the respondent No.2 today. Respondent No.2 submits that nothing remains to be adjudicated further between them and she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. 6.

Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of the settlement between the parties, the State has no objection if the FIR in

question be quashed.

7.

Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the case pending. It will be nothing but abuse of the process of law.

Consequentially, this petition is allowed and FIR No.100/2010, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC & Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station-Mansarovar Park, Delhi, and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed.

8.

The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. Dasti. RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J FEBRUARY 28, 2020/ib