Naaz Hasmi v. State & ANR.

$~46 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 4446/2016 NAAZ HASMI ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.D.K.Pandey, Advocate with the petitioner in person.

versus STATE & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for State with SI Rakesh Rana, P.S. Bharat Nagar, Delhi.

R-2/complainant in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA

O R D E R

% 28.11.2016 Crl.M.A.No.18552/2016 (Exemption) Exemption granted, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.

Crl.M.A.No.18570/2016 (delay in re-filing) This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the present petition. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in re-filing the present petition is condoned.

Application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 4446/2016 This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of FIR bearing No.169/2013, under Sections 406/498-A IPC, registered at Police Station Bharat Nagar, Delhi and all proceedings arising therefrom.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent No.2/complainant was solemnized on 19.02.2010 at Delhi according to Hindu rites and ceremonies and out of the said wed lock, one male child Tayab Hashmi was born on 20.06.2015. He further submits that due to some misunderstanding arisen between the parties, the respondent No.2 got registered an FIR bearing No.169/2013, under Sections 406/498-A IPC at Police Station Bharat Nagar, Delhi. Subsequently, the close friends and near relatives intervened and the matter was amicably settled/compromised between the parties. Counsel further submits that thereafter the respondent No.2 made statement before the Court of Ms.Bimla Kumari, Judge (North-West), Family Court, Delhi on 04.09.2015 in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

that she does not want to proceed further with the case as she has settled the matter with the petitioner and they are residing together as husband and wife. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that since the matter has been amicably settled/compromised between the parties and that the petitioner and respondent No.2 are now living together as husband and wife peacefully and she has no claim or grievance left against the petitioner, hence no purpose would be served to continue with the criminal case/FIR against the petitioner.

therefrom may be quashed.

The respondent No.2/complainant is present in Court today and has been identified by the Investigating Officer, SI Rakesh Rana, P.S. Bharat Nagar, Delhi. The respondent No.2/complainant admits that she has amicably settled/compromised the matter with the petitioner and that she is now peacefully living with the petitioner.

She submits that the misunderstanding has been sorted out and she is left with no claim or grievance of any nature against the petitioner. She further submits that she has got no objection if the present FIR is quashed. Looking into the facts and circumstances, since the matter has been amicably settled/compromised between the parties and the fact that the petitioner and respondent No.2/complainant are now residing together as husband and wife along with their child peacefully and happily, in my view, no purpose would be served in continuing with criminal proceedings against the petitioner. Consequently, FIR bearing No.169/2013, under Sections 406/498-A IPC, registered at Police Station Bharat Nagar, Delhi and all proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

I.S.MEHTA, J NOVEMBER 28, 2016 'dc'