Hari Om v. State & ORS.

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 6057/2018 & Crl.M.A. No.48426/2018 (for exemption) HARI OM ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Harpeet S. Popli, Adv. with petitioner in person.

versus STATE & ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State with SI Jasbir Malik, PS Ranhola.

Mr.Moksh Pasrija, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R D E R

% 30.11.2018 1.

Vide the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.0184/2014 u/s 325 IPC registered at P.S. Ranhola, Delhi and all proceedings emanating therefrom. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent no.2 was solemnised on 27.11.1996 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies and they were blessed with three children and their eldest daughter is already about 18 years old. He submits that however, in March, 2014 due to some temperamental differences, the respondent no.2 left her matrimonial home along with her children and filed a complaint against the petitioner leading to the registration of the captioned FIR.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nowthe parties with the intervention of senior members of the family, have resolved all their disputes amicably and have arrived at a settlement whereby they have decided to live together peacefully. He submits that that as per the settlement, the parties along with their children have been living together since May, 2017 and, therefore, prays that the aforesaid FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed. 4.

The petitioner as also the respondent no.2 are present in Court and have been identified by the Investigating Officer. Respondent no.2 is also represented by a counsel. I have interacted with the respondent no.2, who states that she has decided to resolve her differences with the petitioner of her own free will and without coercion and is now happily residing with the petitioner since May, 2017, i.e. for the last 1 1⁄2 years and she has no complaint of any kind whatsoever against the petitioner. She further states that keeping in view the fact that the future of her children is also involved, she does not want the aforesaid criminal proceedings to continue any further, as it will not only cause acrimony with the petitioner but will also disrupt her happy marital life.

5.

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Keeping in view the fact that the FIR emanates from a matrimonial dispute which already stands resolved between the parties, as a result whereof the parties are now living together happily along with their three children for the last a 11⁄2 years, in my opinion, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings. In my view, the ends of justice demand

that the FIR and consequential proceedings be quashed. 6.

For the aforesaid reasons, the petition is allowed and the captioned FIR and proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. 7.

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

REKHA PALLI, J NOVEMBER 30, 2018 gm