SURESH BHATI AND ORS vs STATE AND ANR

2024-05-07 Information

$~73
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 07.05.2024
+ CRL.M.C. 3648/2024, CRL.M.A. 13982/2024
SURESH BHATI AND ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Sumit Kumar Rana, Advocate with Petitioners-in-person.
versus
STATE AND ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP with Mr. Chaaitanya Jain and Mr. Shishav Shukla, Advocates with SI Sachin, P.S.: Khajuri Khas and Respondent No. 2-in-person with her mother.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
% J U D G M E N T
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 13981/2024
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 3648/2024, CRL.M.A. 13982/2024
1. Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) has been preferred on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of FIR No. 0823/2020, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at P.S.: Khajuri Khas and proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 along with respondent No. 2 in person with her mother appear on advance notice and accept notice.
3. In brief, as per the case of the petitioners, marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was solemnized according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 07.12.2015. A male child was born out of the wedlock, who is presently in custody of petitioner No. 1. Due to temperamental differences, petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 started living separately. On complaint of respondent No. 2, present FIR was registered on 26.10.2020.
4. The disputes have been amicably resolved between the parties vide settlement deed dated 22.05.2023. The marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 has been dissolved by decree of divorce by way of mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act vide judgment dated 04.01.2024.
5. Balance amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- has been paid to respondent No. 2 today through DD No. 218874 dated 26.02.2024 drawn on ICICI Bank, Vivek Vihar, New Delhi Branch in favour of respondent No. 2.
6. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement between the parties, the State has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
7. Petitioners as well as respondent No. 2 with her mother are present in person and have been identified by SI Sachin, P.S.: Khajuri Khas. I have interacted with the parties and they confirm that the matter has been amicably settled between them without any threat, pressure or coercion. Respondent No. 2 also states that nothing remains to be further adjudicated upon between the parties and he has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. However, respondent No. 2 prays that petitioner No. 1 may be directed to honour the settlement for the purpose of visitation rights as the meeting with the child is not effective.
8. Petitioner No. 1 clarifies that there appears to be some hesitation by the child in meeting the mother on account of communication gap between them.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances, since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose shall be served by keeping the case pending. It would be nothing but an abuse of the process of Court. Consequently, FIR No. 0823/2020, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at P.S.: Khajuri Khas and proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed.
Petitioner is also directed to make an endeavour to ensure that visitation rights are implemented in letter and spirit in terms of settlement dated 22.05.2023.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
A copy of this order be forwarded to learned Trial Court for information.

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.
MAY 07, 2024/R

CRL.M.C. 3648/2024 Page 1 of 3