Allowed

Nandram v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC13 Sept 2024CRL.M.C./2418/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition sought quashing of FIR under Sections 363/376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO after the victim turned 18 and married the petitioner; her mother consented. Court found conviction chances remote and quashed the FIR and proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.101/2022 PS Patel Nagar under Sections 363/376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO and proceedings therefrom quashed; parties to abide by settlement terms.

Nandram Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~33

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 2418/2024 CRL.M.A. 9246/2024

¶4

NANDRAM

¶5

.....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Gaurav Tyagi, Mr. Deepanshi Abhishek Khatri Mr. Jatin Nagar & Mr Gaurav Biodhuri, Advocates

¶7

versus

¶8

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. D S Dagar, APP for State SI Bijender Singh PS Patel Nagar

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 13.09.2024

¶12

This petition seeks quashing of FIR No.101/2022 PS Patel Nagar under Sections 363/376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act.

¶13

Victim is present in the Court along with her mother and is duly identified by the IO. Petitioner is also present in the Court and is duly identified by the IO.

¶14

The FIR was registered on the basis of missing report lodged by the complainant, the mother of victim. Victim states that she is now 18 years of age and has since married the petitioner on 22^nd February 2024, and the marriage certificate from Arya Samaj Mandir has also been placed on record of this Court. The date of birth of victim is stated to be 1^st November 2005.

¶15

Complainant, the mother of victim also states that she has no objection to quashing of the FIR since she came to know that her daughter

¶16

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 08:55:17

¶17

(victim) was in relationship with petitioner and now they have married.

¶18

Considering the above settlement between the parties and the chances of conviction of the petitioners being remote and bleak, there is no use continuing with proceedings of the present FIR as it would be a misuse of the process of the Court and an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Consequently, the FIR No. 101/2022 PS Patel Nagar under Sections 363/376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act and proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶19

Parties shall abide by the terms of settlement.

¶20

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Pending applications (if any) are disposed of as infructuous.

¶21

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶22

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶23

SEPTEMBER 13, 2024/sm

¶24

Nandram v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandram v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subodh Sharma Vs Subhash Chander Aggarwal

Chote Lal Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi through SHO Ps. Punjabi Bagh Police Station & Anr.

Daya Kishan and Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Shesh Nath Yadav Vs Suman Yadav

Sh. Pratap Chand Rathor, & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Ajay Vats @ Ajay Kumar Sharma & Ors. Vs State Govt of NCT Delhi & Anr.