Varun Kumar And ORS v. The State (Govt. Of Not Of Delhi) And ANR

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4335/2024 VARUN KUMAR AND ORS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Rakesh Nautiyal, Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advocates alongwith petitioners in person.

versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NOT OF DELHI) AND ANR ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State with W/SI Soni Lal, P.S.

Nabi Karim.

Ms.

Preeti Shrivastava & Mr.

Bhuvneshwer Sharma, Advocates for R-2 alongwith R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

O R D E R

% 27.05.2024 CRL.M.A. 16470/2024 (Exemption filing certified copy) & CRL.M.A. 16469/2024 (Exemption from filing official translation of annexure) 1.

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2.

The applications are accordingly disposed of. CRL.M.C. 4335/2024 3.

The present petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No. 78/2020, under Sections 498A/406/506/509/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Nabi Karim and all other consequential proceedings The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the Court of Dr. Neha Kheria, Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

4.

The marriage between petitioner no.1/husband and respondent no.2/wife was solemnized on 12.11.2017 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. No child was born out of the said wedlock.

5.

Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2, the parties started residing separately from 10.06.2019. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant lodged an FIR against petitioner no.1 (husband), petitioner no. 2 (brother-in-law), petitioner no. 3 (father-inlaw) and petitioner no. 4 (mother-in-law). 6.

On 25.07.2023, parties arrived at a settlement vide Memorandum of Settlement dated 25.07.2023. As per the said settlement deed, petitioner no.1 has agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 3,75,000/- to the respondent no.2/wife towards full and final settlement of all her claims including istridhan, permanent alimony and maintenance - present, past and future. 7.

In terms of the said settlement, the marriage between the parties stands dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 21.12.2023, passed by Sh. Sanjay Kumar Aggarwal, Principal Judge, Family Court, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (Annexure P-5 Colly). Further, as per the settlement deed, an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- has already been paid to respondent no.2 and the remaining amount of Rs. 1,25,000/- has been paid to her in Court today, by means of a demand draft. 8.

Petitioners and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel, as well as the Investigating Officer, W/SI Soni Lal, P.S. Nabi Karim. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

9.

A demand draft bearing no. 911111 dated 16.03.2024, for Rs. 1,25,000/- drawn on State Bank of India, Padam Nagar, Kishangunj, Delhi has been handed over to the complainant/Respondent No.2, who acknowledges the receipt of the same.

10.

The complainant/respondent no.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioners and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed. She further states that all the terms of the agreement have been complied with.

11.

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR is quashed. 12.

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:- "61. ... In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding."

13.

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and the fact that the parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No. 78/2020, under Sections 498A/406/506/509/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Nabi Karim and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the Court of Dr. Neha Kheria, Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

14.

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 78/2020, under Sections 498A/406/506/509/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Nabi Karim and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the Court of Dr. Neha Kheria, Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, is hereby quashed.

15.

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 16.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. AMIT SHARMA, J MAY 27, 2024/bsr Click here to check corrigendum, if any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.