Allowed

Ravi Kumar & Ors. v. the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC8 Feb 2024CRL.M.C./343/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court quashed FIRs under Sections 498A and 406 IPC filed in a matrimonial dispute. The court noted a settlement between parties, payment of agreed amounts, and subsequent divorce. Relying on Gian Singh, it held quashing discharged a useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 199/2021 under Sections 498A/406 IPC registered at P.S. Kalindi Kunj, Delhi is quashed.

Ravi Kumar & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Domestic Violence | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 343/2024

¶4

RAVI KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Yograj Gullaiya, Adv. with petitioners in person. versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for State with SI Ved Prakash P.S. Kalindi Kunj. Mr. Shambhu Kumar, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Thakur, Mr. Rakesh Kumar Paswan and Mr. Kunjan Singh, Advs. for complainant with complainant in person.

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

% 08.02.2024

¶9

CRL.M.A. 1364/2024 (Exemption)

¶10

Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶11

The application is disposed of accordingly.

¶12

CRL.M.C. 343/2024

¶13

The present petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No. 199/2021, under Sections 498A/406 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Kalindi Kunj, Delhi.

¶14

The marriage between petitioner no.1/husband and respondent no.2/wife was solemnized on 15.05.2019 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies.

¶15

No child was born out of the said wedlock.

¶16

Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner no. 1 and

¶17

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 16/12/2024 at 14:28:08

¶18

respondent no. 2, the parties started residing separately from 23.06.2019. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant lodged an FIR against petitioner no.1 (husband), petitioner no. 2 (mother-in-law) and petitioner no. 3 (fatherin-law), petitioner no.4 (brother-in-law), petitioner no.5 (sister-in-law) and petitioner no.6 (brother-in-law).

¶19

On 11.01.2023, parties arrived at a settlement and as per the said settlement deed, petitioner no.1 has agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 5,50,000/- to the respondent no.2/wife towards full and final settlement of all her claims including istridhan , permanent alimony and maintenance - present, past and future. The copy of the aforesaid settlement deed dated 11.01.2023 is on record (Annexure P-2).

¶20

In terms of the said settlement, the marriage between the parties stands dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 09.11.2023, passed by Shri Harish Kumar, Judge, Family Court Patiala House Courts, New Delhi (Annexure P-7). Further, as per the settlement deed, an amount of Rs. 2,25,000/- has already been paid to respondent no.2 and the remaining amount of Rs. 2,25,000/- has been paid to her in court today, by means of a demand draft.

¶21

Petitioners and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel, as well as the Investigating Officer, SI Ved Prakash P.S. Kalindi Kunj. 10. A demand draft bearing no. 089485 dated 09.01.2024 for Rs. 2,25,000/- drawn on Canara Bank, has been handed over to the complainant/respondent no.2, who acknowledges the receipt of the same.

¶22

The complainant/respondent no.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioners and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed.

¶23

¶24

She further states that all the terms of the agreement have been complied with.

¶25

Learned APP for the State submits that the chargesheet in the present case has not been filed. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR is quashed. 13. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:-

¶26

“61. ... In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.”

¶27

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and the fact that the parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No. 0199/2021, under Sections 498A/406 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Kalindi Kunj, Delhi.

¶28

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 0199/2021, under Sections 498A/406 IPC, registered at P.S. Kalindi Kunj, Delhi, is hereby quashed.

¶29

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶30

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶31

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶32

FEBRUARY 08, 2024 / nk

¶33

Ravi Kumar & Ors. v. the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Kumar & Ors. v. the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Angoori Devi Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Jogender Singh Vs the State Goverment of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Kulwinder Singh Vs State

Sh Surjeet Singh Vs Smt Swarna Kour

Anil Pathak Vs State of (Nct of Delhi)

Praveen Kumar Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.