← Library
High Court of DelhiCRL.M.C./9472/2024

Mr Ayush Arora & ORS. v. State Of National Capital & ANR.

2024-12-03Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh3 pages

$~107 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 9472/2024 MR AYUSH ARORA & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Ajay Malhotra, Mr. Angad Singh Khanna, Advs.

versus STATE OF NATIONAL CAPITAL & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP with SI Pardeep Kumar, PS Rajouri Garden Mr. Anuj Garg, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 03.12.2024 CRL.M.A. 36346/2024 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 9472/2024 1.

This is a petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 0754/2023 dated 29.09.2023 filed u/s 498A/406/ 34 of IPC registered at PS Rajouri Garden. 2.

As per the FIR, there are allegations of cruelty, dowry demand and usurping stridhan of the complainant.

3.

The parties have arrived at a settlement on 05.03.2024, wherein the petitioner is to pay a sum of Rs. 75 lakhs to respondent No. 2. Rs. 50 lakhs The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

has already been given to the respondent and the remaining sum of Rs. 25 lakhs is paid today vide DD No. 102132 dated 12.11.2024 drawn on Bank of Baroda.

4.

Parties state that they have arrived at the settlement out of their own free will without any threat, pressure, coercion or undue influence. 5.

Petitioner is present in court and is identified by Mr. Ajay Malhotra, Adv. Respondent No. 2 is present through VC and is identified by Mr. Anuj Garg, Adv. and IO SI Pardeep Kumar, PS Rajouri Garden. 6.

I am of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in prosecuting the FIR any further on the ground that the parties have arrived at a voluntary settlement and settled their disputes. 7.

I am convinced that quashing of such proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and would secure ends of justice. The Court does not see any fruitful purpose if criminal proceedings as permitted to continue any further. It is a fit case for quashing. In this view of the matter, there is no reason to continue the proceedings. 8.

There is a minor child aged 4 years, who is in the care and custody of respondent No. 2. It is directed that in view of the judgment Ganesh v. Sudhir Kumar Shrivastava [(2020) 20 SCC 787], the settlement executed between the petitioners and respondent No. 2, and this order shall have no effect on the rights of child of the parties, who shall be free to avail all legal rights and remedies towards inheritance, maintenance, education, marriage expenses etc. against either of her parents.

9.

In this view of the matter, FIR No. 0754/2023 dated 29.09.2023 filed u/s 498A/406/ 34 of IPC registered at PS Rajouri Garden and consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

10.

The petition is disposed of.

JASMEET SINGH, J DECEMBER 3, 2024/DM 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.