Rishi Parkash & ORS. v. State NCT Of Delhi And ANR

$~65 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 9297/2024 & CRL.M.A. 35660/2024 RISHI PARKASH & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr.

Pujya Kumar singh, Ms.

Manubala and Mr. Ahul Bharati, Advocates.

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State with SI Yogesh Sharma, P.S. Subhash Place.

Mr. Nasir Kamal, Advocate for R-2 alongiwth R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

O R D E R

% 28.11.2024 By way of the present petition filed under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioners, who are the former husband and in-laws of the complainant/respondent No. 2, seek quashing of case FIR No. 738/2016 dated 28.12.2016 registered under sections 498-A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC') at P.S.: Subhash Place, Delhi.

2.

The petition is premised on Mediated Settlement dated 20.09.2023 arrived at through mediation before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts, Delhi; and Divorce Decree dated 03.04.2024, which is the culmination of petitions under sections 13B(1) and 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, whereby the parties had sought dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent. CRL.M.C. 9297/2024 Page 1 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

3.

The petition is supported by affidavits of the petitioners, as also of respondent No. 2, alongwith proof of their IDs. 4.

The petitioners as well as respondent No. 2 are present in court. Their credentials have been verified and they have also been identified by their respective counsel.

5.

The parties have confirmed that no child was born from the wedlock. 6.

No appeal is stated to have been filed against the divorce decree. 7.

The court has queried respondent No. 2, who confirms that she has taken divorce by mutual consent; and that a mediated settlement has been entered into between the parties; and that in full-and-final settlement of all her claims including towards maintenance (past, present and future), stridhan, dowry articles, jewellery, permanent alimony, etc., she was to receive a sum of Rs. 7,50,000/- from petitioner No. 1; out of which Rs. 5,00,000/- was paid earlier and Rs.2,50,000/- has been paid in court today, in compliance of the terms of the mediated settlement. Respondent No. 2 confirms that all aspects of the settlement have now been performed.

8.

Mr. Hitesh Vali, learned APP confirms that the State has no objection to the subject FIR being quashed.

9.

In the circumstances, in line with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2012) 10 SCC 303 as also in Narinder Singh &Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466, this court sees no reason why the subject FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom should not be quashed. This court is of the view that in light of the settlement between the contesting parties, continuing with the subject FIR and all CRL.M.C. 9297/2024 Page 2 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

subsequent proceedings would be an exercise in futility and would not be conducive to peace and harmony between the parties. 10.

Accordingly, FIR No. 738/2016 dated 28.12.2016 registered under sections 498-A/406/34 IPC at P.S.: Subhash Place, Delhi is quashed. All proceedings arising therefrom also stand closed. 11.

Petition stands disposed-of.

12.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J NOVEMBER 28, 2024 V.Rawat CRL.M.C. 9297/2024 Page 3 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.