Madan & ORS v. State Of Delhi & ANR

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1732/2019 MADAN & ORS .... Petitioners Through Mr. Anurag Parashar, Adv.

with P-1 to 3 in person versus STATE OF DELHI & ANR .... Respondents Through Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP Mr. Darshan Sharma, Adv. for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

O R D E R

% 24.09.2019 1.

Issue notice.

2.

Notice is accepted by the learned APP for the State as well as by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that due to typographical mistake the name of the respondent No.2 is wrongly mentioned as Ms. Suman Kumar instead of Ms. Suman Kumari and prayed that the same may be corrected.

4.

In view of the oral submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the name of the respondent No.2 is corrected and now the same shall be read as Ms. Suman Kumari in the petition. 5.

The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.131/2016, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code,

1860 ('IPC'), registered at P.S.: Uttam Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

6.

The petitioners and respondent No.2 as well as their respective counsel submitted that the parties have settled their disputes on their own free will, without any force or coercion before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi on 9.6.2016. 7.

Respondent No.2, who is present in Court, has reiterated the aforesaid facts and submitted that she is now living happily with the petitioner No.1 since 8.6.2016 and she has no complaint whatsoever against the petitioners. Respondent No.2 further submitted that she has no objection to the petition being allowed and the FIR being quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that in the interest of justice and for the welfare of the parties, as well as taking into consideration the fact that the parties are now living happily, the FIR may be quashed.

8.

The Investigating Officer ('IO'), who is present in Court, has identified the petitioners as well as respondent No.2 and has also verified the settlement arrived at between the parties. 9.

In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the parties entangled in the criminal proceedings. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, FIR No.131/2016, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S.: Uttam Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

10.

Petition is disposed of in above terms.

CHANDER SHEKHAR, J SEPTEMBER 24, 2019/rk