PARAS HANS & ORS. vs THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.
$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 30.04.2024
+ CRL. M.C. 2873/2024
PARAS HANS & ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Padam Kumar Khanna, Advocate
alongwith petitioners in person.
versus
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. …. Respondents
Through: Ms.Kiran Bairwa, APP for State with
SI Vijay Maan, P.S. Civil Lines.
Mr.Javed, Advocate with respondent
No.2 (through VC).
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
% J U D G M E N T
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
$~19
*INTHE HIGH COURT OFDELHIAT NEW DELHI%Date of Decision:30.04.2024
+ CRL.M.C.2873/2024
PARAS HANS & ORS…… PetitionersThrough:Mr.PadamKumar Khanna, Advocatealongwithpetitionersinperson.
versus
THE STATE(NCTOF DELHI) & ANR….. Respondents
Through:Ms.KiranBairwa, APP for State withSI Vijay Maan, P.S.Civil Lines.
Mr.Javed,AdvocatewithrespondentNo.2(through VC).
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA%J U D G M E N TANOOP KUMARMENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
1.Petitionunder Section482of the Code of CriminalProcedure, 1973(Cr.P.C.) hasbeenpreferredonbehalf of the petitionersforquashingofFIR No. 237/2021,under Sections498A/406/34IPC registeredatP.S.:
Civil Lines.
2.Inbrief, asperthecase of the petitioners, marriagebetweenpetitionerNo.1 andrespondentNo. 2wassolemnizedaccordingtoHinduritesandceremonieson29.02.2016.Amale childwasbornoutof wedlockwhoispresentlyincustodyof respondentNo.2. Due totemperamentaldifferences,
respondentNo.2andpetitioner No.1startedlivingseparately. Oncomplaintof respondent No. 2present FIR was registeredon 18.06.2021.
3.The disputesare statedtohave beenamicablysettledbetweenthe
partiesintermsof SettlementDeeddated03.06.2022.The marriage between
CRL. M.C. 2873/2024Page 1of2
(Certifier’s identity unknown) Signed by DINESH CHANDRA
petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 has been dissolved by decree of
divorce under Section 13 B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act vide judgment
dated 05.12.2022.
petitioner No. 1andrespondentNo. 2hasbeendissolvedbydecree ofdivorce under Section13B(2) of the HinduMarriage Actvide judgmentdated05.12.2022.
4.LearnedAPPfor the State submitsthatinviewof amicable settlementbetweentheparties, the State hasnoobjectionincase the FIRinquestionisquashed.
5.PetitionerNo.1aswellasrespondentNo.2are presentinpersonandhave beenidentifiedbySIVijayMaan, P.S.:CivilLines.Presence of
petitionersNo.2to4isexempted. I have interactedwiththepartiesandtheyconfirmthatthe matter hasbeenamicablysettledbetweenthemwithoutanythreat,pressure or coercion.RespondentNo. 2alsostatesthatnothingremainstobe furtheradjudicateduponbetweenthe partiesandshe hasnoobjection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
6.Consideringthe factsandcircumstances,since the matter hasbeenamicablysettledbetweenthe parties, nousefulpurpose shallbeservedbykeepingthecase pending. Itwouldbe nothingbutanabuseoftheprocessof
Court. Consequently, FIR No. 237/2021,under Sections498A/406/34IPC
registered atP.S.:Civil Linesstandsquashed.
Petitionisaccordinglydisposedof.Pendingapplications, if any, alsostand disposedof.
ANOOP KUMARMENDIRATTA, J.
APRIL 30, 2024/v
CRL. M.C. 2873/2024Page 2of2
(Certifier’s identity unknown) Signed by DINESH CHANDRA