Sandeep Rathi @ Sandeep Rathee & ORS v. The State & ANR

$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5671/2018 & CRL.MA.35877/2018 SANDEEP RATHI @ SANDEEP RATHEE & ORS ..... Petitioner Through Ms.Poonam Mahajan, Adv.

versus THE STATE & ANR ..... Respondent Through Ms.Manjeet Arya, APP with SI Prabhakaran, PS Chhawala.

Mr.Akil, Adv for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R D E R

% 12.11.2018 1.

Vide the present petition u/s 482 CrPC, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.0439/2017 u/s 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Chhawala, Delhi and all proceedings emanating therefrom, based on a settlement deed dated 15.01.2018 arrived at by the parties with the assistance of the Counsellor, Family Courts, Dwarka, Delhi.

2.

Ms.Poonam Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the marriage between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 was solemnised on 12.03.2006 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies and they were blessed with a baby girl, but subsequently due to temperamental differences they started living separately w.e.f 05.03.2017. As a result, the respondent no.2 lodged a complaint

against the petitioners leading to the registration of the aforesaid FIR. 3.

Ms.Mahajan submits that the parties, have now arrived at a settlement before the Family Courts, Dwarka on 15.01.2018 and resolved all their differences. She submits that the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 have decided to part ways and consequently a decree of divorce dissolving their marriage has already been passed by the learned Family Court on 25.10.2018. She further submits that the entire agreed amount of Rs.1 lakh has already been paid to the respondent no.2 and, therefore, prays that the aforesaid FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed.

4.

The petitioners as also respondent no.2 alongwith her counsel are present in Court and have been identified by the Investigating Officer. I have also interacted with the respondent no.2, who states that she has decided to resolve her differences with the petitioners of her own free will and has entered into the settlement without any coercion. She further states that she has received the entire agreed amount and does not want to pursue the aforesaid criminal proceedings as she wants to move on in life and, therefore, does not want any further acrimony with the petitioners. 5.

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Keeping in view the fact that the present FIR emanates from a matrimonial dispute, which now stands resolved between the parties, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the criminal proceedings when the parties themselves have already resolved their differences and want to move on in life. In my view, the ends of justice demand that the FIR and consequent

proceedings be quashed.

6.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the captioned FIR is quashed, subject to the petitioners paying Rs.20,000/- in the form of an FDR in the name of Ms.Lakshita minor daughter of the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 through her legal guardian i.e. Ms.Sanjeeta/respondent no.2 within four weeks from today. The original FDR would be handed over to the respondent no.2 and a copy of the same will be handed over to the Investigating Officer for production before the Trial Court. In case the petitioners are not able to provide the FDR in the above terms on 14.11.2018, the next date fixed before the learned Trial Court, the learned Trial Court is requested to adjourn the matter and accommodate the parties to enable the petitioners to comply with the above directions of this Court.

7.

The petition alongwith the pending application is disposed of in the above terms.

REKHA PALLI, J NOVEMBER 12, 2018 sr