Vinod Bajaj & ORS v. State (Govt Of NCT Of Delhi) & ANR

15# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + VINOD BAJAJ & ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by:

Mr. Sachin Sharma and Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocates with petitioner No.1 in person.

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

Mr. Avi Singh, Additional Standing Counsel for State and Ms. Purnima Malik, Advocate with SI Dalbir Singh, PS Mahindra Park.

Respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 24.11.2017 Crl. M.A. No. 6188/2017 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

10.

By the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 565/2015 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Mahendra Park, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter. 11.

Issue notice.

12.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the State.

13.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel on instructions from the Investigating Officer submits that in the above noted FIR the petitioners are the only accused and the respondent No. 2 the only complainant/victim in the above noted FIR.

14.

The complainant/Respondent No. 2 Ms. Rakhee, who is present in Court and is identified by the Investigating Officer states that she has settled the matter with the petitioners. In terms of the settlement marriage between the Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.2/complainant has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. As full and final settlement of all the claims, that is, maintenance, streedhan and alimony etc. of the Respondent No. 2 the Petitioner No.1 has to pay a sum of ₹1.50 lakhs out of which ₹1 lakhs has been paid to respondent No.1 and balance amount of ₹50,000/- has been paid to her today in Court vide Banker's Cheque No.604948 dated 5th September, 2017 drawn on State Bank of India, Dilshad Garden, Delhi and now she has no claims whatsoever remaining against the petitioners. Respondent No.

2 further states that the minor daughter Bani, born out of the wedlock of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 would remain in the care and custody of respondent No.2 and petitioners will not even have visitation rights. She also states that in terms of the settlement she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto and she will abide by the terms of settlement.

15.

Petitioner No.1 is present in Court and is identified by learned counsel. Petitioner No.2 is stated to be suffering from heart ailment and petitioner No.3 is at home look after her. Thus petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are exempted from appearing before this Court. Petitioner No.1 affirms the

statement of respondent No.2 and states that he will abide by the terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 16.

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.

17.

Consequently, FIR No. 565/2015 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Mahendra Park, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.

18.

Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.

19.

Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

NOVEMBER 24, 2017 'vn'