Sh. Jai Raj v. State & ORS.

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3365/2024 SH. JAI RAJ .....Petitioner Through:

Mr.

Vineet Kr.

Singh, Mr.

B.B.Sharma, Mr. Amit Upadhyay, Mr. Sumit Goswami and Ms. Vidya Sagar Pandey, Advocates.

versus STATE & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP for the State with SI Sangeeta, P.S.S.B.Dairy.

Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Mr.Abhishek Chauhan and Mr.

Amit P.Shahi, Advocates for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R

% 04.09.2024 1.

The present Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C., 1973") has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking to quash the FIR No. 295/2019 registered under Sections 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC, 1860") read with Section 8 of POCSO Act at Police Station Shahbad Dairy.

2.

It is submitted that the petitioner and the respondents have settled all the disputes and differences between them on the basis of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the statement of the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C and in their affidavits supporting the petition.

3.

Both the parties are present in person in the Court. The complainant/father of Prosecutrix is also present in the Court today, and they have been identified by their counsel and Investigating Officer concerned.

4.

The parties endorse that the petitioner and respondent No.3 have got married at Arya Samaj Mandir on 27.03.2021 and since then they have been residing together and have two children. The complainant/father of the Prosecutrix present in the Court submits that they have accepted the marriage of the parties and all are living happily without any accord/differences.

5.

The parties have submitted that all the disputes have been amicably settled and thus, no fruitful purpose will be served in continuing with the FIR.

6.

Today, the complainant and respondent No. 3, who are present in the Court, state that they have settled all the disputes with the petitioner and have no objection if the FIR is quashed. 7.

In view of the above facts that the parties have amicably resolved their differences out of their own free will and without any coercion, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them. Hence, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. 8.

Moreover, there is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

9.

Accordingly, FIR No. 295/2019 registered under Sections 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC, 1860") read with Section 8 of POCSO Act at Police Station Shahbad Dairy and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

10.

The petition along with pending application stands disposed of. NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J SEPTEMBER 4, 2024 rk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.