Raunak Kumar @ Raunak Kumar Chorasia v. The State (NCT Of Delhi) & ANR

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 05th January, 2026 + RAUNAK KUMAR @ RAUNAK KUMAR CHORASIA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Ekram Ali Ansari, Advocate.

Petitioner in person through Video Conferencing versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Ashmeet Singh, APP for the State with SI Rohitash Yadav, PS Neb Sarai.

Respondent No.2 in person (through V.C.) Wife and mother-in-law of petitioner

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) CRL.M.A. 32/2026 (exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS on behalf of the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No. 972/2015 registered under Section 365 IPC at P.S. Neb Sarai, Delhi on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes.

2.

The present FIR was registered on the basis of complaint lodged by Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta in which he stated that his elder daughter was missing. She had reportedly gone to her friend's place on 11.07.2015 but did not return. Based on his complaint, the abovesaid FIR No.972/2015 was registered.

3.

During investigation, the elder daughter of the complainant was recovered and police also came across 'certificate of marriage' which indicated that she had married Sh. Raunak Kumar (petitioner herein) much prior i.e. on 02.06.2014.

4.

Her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was also recorded in which she, however, went on to claim that her signatures on some blank paper were obtained on some misrepresentation.

5.

After comprehensive investigation, a chargesheet was filed before the learned Trial Court for commission of offence under Section 365 IPC. 6.

The charges are yet to be ascertained.

7.

As already noted above, the case is of the year 2015. 8.

It is now informed that the abovesaid marriage has been duly accepted by the complainant and his family members. In fact, the complainant and his son-in-law i.e. the accused Raunak Kumar have joined the proceedings from Bihar through video conferencing and prosecutrix and her mother are present, physically, before this Court.

9.

When asked, prosecutrix stated that she is living happily with her husband. She reveals that she has voluntarily married Sh. Raunak Kumar (accused/petitioner) and from such marriage, they are having two children. Both her children are also present today in Court. 10.

The quashing application is supported by affidavit of complainant Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta in which he has, clearly, mentioned that the matter has been settled and in terms of settlement, he is left with no grievance against the petitioner. He has also mentioned therein that his daughter is living happily along with her children with the petitioner Ranuak Kumar and that he has no objection if FIR is quashed.

11.

The Court has also made specific queries from wife of the petitioner and she has also very, clearly, stated that she is living happily with her husband and has no grievance of any nature whatsoever and she also wants the criminal proceedings in question to be closed. 12.

The Investigating Officer (I.O.) is present and confirms the broad facts and identifies the complainant and his daughter. 13.

As already noticed above, the chargesheet is merely for offence under Section 365 IPC and even as per her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., there is revelation of no other offence. 14.

In view of the above, since the marriage in question has been accepted by the complainant, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings alive and, resultantly, for securing ends of justice, aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings, arising therefrom, are hereby quashed. 15.

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of. (MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE JANUARY 05, 2026 st/sy