Sonu & ORS v. The State & ANR

$~44 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + SONU & ORS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr.Pankaj Kumar, Advocate with Petitioners in person versus THE STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Mr.Amit Chadha, APP for the State with SI Kaushik Ghai, PS Shahdra with Complainant in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI

O R D E R

% 02.05.2018 1.

The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking quashing of FIR No.416/2017, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC & Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at P.S. Shahdara, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties. 2.

Notice. Learned APP for the State/R-1 accepts notice. Respondent No.2 is present in person and accepts notice. 3.

Briefly stating the facts of the present case are that respondent No.2 got married to petitioner No.1 on 17.04.2016. However, due to certain temperamental differences, the respondent No.2 left the matrimonial home and started living separately. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 filed a criminal complaint against the petitioners which resulted into registration of FIR in question.

4.

It is mentioned in the petition that during the pendency of above proceedings, the parties arrived at an amicable settlement before the Principal Judge, Family Courts, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi vide Settlement Deed dated 15.03.2018. A copy of the settlement has been placed on record as Annexure-P-2 (Colly).

5.

In terms of full and final settlement arrived at between the parties, today learned counsel for the petitioners has handed over to respondent No.2 a sum of `1 lakh by way of Demand Drafts No.958683, 958684 & 958685 dated 25.04.2018 amounting to `40,000/-, `20,000/- & `40,000/- respectively [totaling to `1,00,000/-], which the respondent No.2 has accepted. Copy of the demand drafts has also been placed on record. 6.

Respondent No.2 is present in person and submits that she has settled the matter with the petitioners and in terms of said settlement, today she has received `1 lakh by way of demand drafts from the petitioners. Respondent No.2 further submits that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed qua the Petitioners.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after the matter in dispute has been amicably settled between the parties, no purpose would be served in prosecuting the petitioners, therefore the FIR in question and criminal proceedings emanating therefrom may be quashed. 8.

In view of the legal position laid down in the decision reported as Gian Singh v State of Punjab & Anr. 2012 (9) SCALE 257 and the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties before the Mediation Centre, I am of the considered view that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners, which will only be an exercise in futile and wastage of precious time of the Court.

9.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and FIR No.416/2017, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC & Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at P.S. Shahdara, Delhi and consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. The Parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of settlement dated 15.03.2018 arrived at before Principal Judge, Family Courts, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, copy of which is placed on record as Annexure-P-2 (colly).

Order dasti.

PRATIBHA RANI, J.

MAY 02, 2018 „hkaur‟