Pramod Kumar @ Rinku & ORS. v. State & ANR.

$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + PRAMOD KUMAR @ RINKU & ORS.

..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Prabhakar Pandey, Advocate alongwith petitioners in person

Versus

STATE & ANR.

..... Respondents Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State with ASI Karamvir Singh, P.S. North Rohini Mr. Amrish Kumar, Advocate for respondent No. Respondent No. 2 in person alonwith her father.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 02.03.2020 CRL.M.A. 4547/2020 (Exemption) 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application stands disposed of.

1.

The present proceedings are instituted seeking quashing of FIR No. 57/2017 under Sections 328/342/354(C)/34 IPC registered at Police Station North Rohini, Delhi on the ground of settlement having been arrived at between the parties.

2.

As per the case of the prosecution, the present FIR has been filed by respondent No.2 against petitioner No.1 (husband), petitioner No.2 (fatherin-law), petitioner No.3 (brother-in-law) and petitioner No.4 (friend of

petitioner No.1) who locked her up at the house of petitioner No.4 on the pretext of taking her to her parental home. They also made certain objectionable videos and threatened her with the same. 3.

Ms. Manjeet Arya, learned APP for the State, submits that the charge sheet in the present case has been filed under the aforesaid sections against the petitioners and respondent no.2 is the only complainant/victim. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and respondent no.2 have entered into a settlement on 14.08.2019 before Mediation Cell, Rohini Courts, Delhi. A copy of the same is annexed with the petition as Annexure P-2. In terms of the settlement, a demand of Rs.2,00,000/- bearing No. 602171 drawn on Allahabad Bank dated 28.02.2020 has been handed over to respondent no.2. In terms of the settlement, respondent No. 2 is now left with no claim whatsoever against the petitioners.

5.

The petitioners and respondent no.2 who are present in person are identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer. The petitioners have shown remorse for their conduct and have undertaken not to repeat the same in future.

6.

Respondent no. 2 states that she has entered into the settlement with the petitioners out of her own free will, volition and without any undue force, pressure or coercion. She further states that the petitioners have not repeated the same incident and that she has no objection if the present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed.

7.

Learned counsels for the parties submit that besides the present FIR there is connected FIR No. 225/2017, under Sections 498A/406/34 P.S.

Jahangir Puri, Delhi and quashing of the same is sought in CRL.M.C. 1170/2020.

8.

The parties shall remain bound by their statements made in Court today.

9.

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties voluntarily, in my view, no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the present criminal proceedings. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed. 10.

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of. 11.

Order dasti to the counsels for the parties.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J MARCH 02, 2020/p'ma