FIROZ ANSARI & ORS. vs STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR.
$~64
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 06.05.2024
+ CRL. M.C. 3567/2024
FIROZ ANSARI & ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Shivam Deep Singh and
Ms. Seema Dagra, Advocates with
Petitioners-in-person.
versus
STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR. …. Respondents
Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP for State with
SI Ajit Krishna, PS: Gokulpuri.
Mr. Vipin Bansal, Advocate for R-2
with R-2 in-person.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
% J U D G M E N T
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 13704/2024
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 3567/2024
$~64
*INTHE HIGH COURT OFDELHIAT NEW DELHI%Date of Decision:06.05.2024
+ CRL.M.C.3567/2024
FIROZ ANSARI & ORS…… Petitioners
Through:Mr.ShivamDeepSinghandMs. Seema Dagra, AdvocateswithPetitioners-in-person.
versus
STATEOF NCT DELHI & ANR….. Respondents
Through:Ms. KiranBairwa, APP for State withSI Ajit Krishna, PS:Gokulpuri.
Mr. VipinBansal, Advocate for R-2with R-2in-person.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA%J U D G M E N TANOOP KUMARMENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 13704/2024
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Applicationstandsdisposedof.
CRL.M.C. 3567/2024
1.Petitionunder Section482of the Code of CriminalProcedure, 1973(Cr.P.C.) hasbeenpreferredonbehalf of the petitionersforquashingofFIR No. 0112/2013under Sections498A/406/34IPC andSection4ofDowryProhibitionAct, 1961, registeredatP.S.: Gokulpuriandproceedingsemanatingtherefrom.ChargesheethasbeenfiledunderSections498A/406/
174A/34 IPC and Section4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2.Issue notice. LearnedAPP for the State andlearnedcounselforrespondentNo. 2alongwithrespondentNo. 2inpersonappear onadvance
CRL. M.C.3567/2024Page 1of 3
(Certifier’s identity unknown) Signed by DINESH CHANDRA
notice and accept notice.
notice and acceptnotice.
3.Inbrief, asperthecase of the petitioners, marriagebetweenpetitionerNo. 1andrespondentNo. 2wassolemnizedaccordingtoMuslimritesandcustomson 26.09.2010. Three childrenwere bornoutof the wedlock. Due totemperamentaldifferences, petitionerNo.1andrespondentNo. 2startedlivingseparately. Oncomplaintof respondentNo. 2, presentFIR wasregisteredon19.03.2013.
4.The disputes have beenamicablyresolved between the partiesintermsof settlementdeeddated29.04.2024andpartiesare residingtogether since30.04.2014.
5.LearnedAPP for the State submitsthatinviewof amicable settlementbetweentheparties, the State hasnoobjectionincase the FIRinquestionisquashed.However, shepointsoutthatSection174AIPC wasinvokedagainst petitioner No. 1, sincehe failedto join the investigation.
6.Learnedcounselfor the petitionerssubmitsthatpetitioner No.1wasunable toappear atthe relevanttime, since hehadchangedhisaddressandwasunaware oftheprocess,ifanyissuedunderSection82/83Cr.P.C.attheearlier address.
7.PetitionersaswellasrespondentNo. 2arepresentinpersonandhavebeenidentifiedbySI AjitKrishna, PS:Gokulpuri.I have interactedwiththepartiesandtheyconfirmthatthe matter hasbeenamicablysettledbetweenthemwithoutanythreat, pressure or coercion. RespondentNo. 2alsostatesthatnothingremainstobe further adjudicateduponbetweenthe partiesandhe hasnoobjection in case the FIR inquestionisquashed.
8.Partiesintendtoputquietustothe proceedingsarisingoutof
matrimonialdisputes. Thesettlementshallpromote harmonybetweenthe
CRL. M.C.3567/2024Page 2of 3
(Certifier’s identity unknown) Signed by DINESH CHANDRA
parties and permit them to move further in life. The chances of conviction
are bleak in view of amicable settlement between the parties.
partiesandpermitthemtomove further inlife. The chancesof convictionare bleak in view of amicable settlementbetweenthe parties.
9.Consideringthe factsandcircumstances,since the matter hasbeenamicablysettledbetweenthe parties, nousefulpurpose shallbeservedbykeepingthecase pending. Itwouldbe nothingbutanabuseoftheprocessof
Court. Consequently, FIR No. 0112/2013,under Sections498A/406/
174A/34IPC andSection4of DowryProhibitionAct, 1961, registeredatP.S.: Gokulpuriandproceedings emanating therefrom standquashed.
10.Inthe factsandcircumstancesinsteadof imposingcost,petitionerNo.
1isdirectedtoplant10saplingsof trees, whichare upto03feetinheightinthe localparksinthe residentialarea withinjurisdictionof PS:Gokulpuri,
Delhiafter gettingintouchwiththe competentauthority(i.e.Horticulture
Departmentof MCD/DDA/Conservator of Forests, Departmentof Forests& Wildlife, Govt. of NCTof Delhi) throughIO/SHO, PS: Gokulpuri. The
photographsof plantedsaplingsalongwithreportof IO/SHOconcernedshallbe forwardedtothisCourtwithineightweeks. Further, the upkeepof
the saplings/treesshallbe undertakenbythe authoritiesconcerned. Incase
of noncompliance ofdirectionsfor plantingof trees, the petitionersshallbeliable todepositcostof Rs. 20,000/-withthe DelhiState LegalServicesAuthority.
Petitionisaccordinglydisposedof.Pendingapplications, if any, alsostand disposedof.
Acopyof thisorder beforwardedtolearnedTrialCourtfor
information.
ANOOP KUMARMENDIRATTA, J.
MAY 06, 2024/R
CRL. M.C.3567/2024Page 3of 3
(Certifier’s identity unknown) Signed by DINESH CHANDRA