Sachin Jain & ANR v. State (NCT Of Delhi) & ANR

3# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2636/2016 SACHIN JAIN & ANR ..... Petitioners Represented by:

Mr. Piyush Jain, Advocate with petitioners in person.

versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by:

Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP for the State with SI K.P. Singh, PS Seelam Pur and ASI Yamuna Prasad, PS Khajoori Khas.

Respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 01.09.2016 By the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 128/2013 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at PS Seelampur, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 on the ground that the parties have settled the matter. Learned APP for the State on instructions from the Investigating Officer submits that though the charge sheet was filed against five accused persons however, the three petitioners in the present petition, that is, Sachin Jain, Smt. Trishla Jain and Smt. Reena Jain were summoned as accused. She further states that Priti Jain is the only complainant/victim in the present FIR.

The complainant/Respondent No. 2 Ms. Priti Jain is present in Court and is identified by the Investigating Officer. She states that the Petitioners CRL.M.C. 2636/2016

and Respondent No.2/Complainant have entered into a Compromise and she is living with the petitioner No.1 separately from the joint family and has no cause of grievance against any of the petitioners. She further states that she had been residing with the petitioner No.1 cordially for the last more than two years and during this period a child has been born on 15th June, 2015 from the wedlock. She further states that in view of the settlement between the parties, she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

Petitioners, who are present in Court and are identified by their counsel, state that they will abide by the terms of the settlement. In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

Consequently, FIR No. 128/2013 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at PS Seelampur, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed. Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.

The petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

SEPTEMBER 01, 2016/'vn'

CRL.M.C. 2636/2016