Allowed

Tajinder Singh & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC16 Feb 2024CRL.M.C./378/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition for quashing FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC dismissed by the parties following a settlement. The High Court, relying on Gian Singh, allowed the petition and quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings including the pending chargesheet.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 547/2020 and all consequential proceedings including pending chargesheet.

Tajinder Singh & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 378/2024 & CRL.M.A. 1473/2024 (Exemption)

¶4

TAJINDER SINGH & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Vinay J. And Mr. Deepak N., Advocates alongwith P-1 to 3 in person and P-4 through VC.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State. SI Km. Jyoti, PS Hari Nagar. R-2 in person.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 16.02.2024

¶11

The present petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of the FIR No. 547/2020, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Hari Nagar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Karuna, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-02, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

¶12

The marriage between petitioner no.1/husband and respondent no.2/wife was solemnized on 13.05.2019 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. 3. No child was born out of the said wedlock.

¶13

Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2, the parties started residing separately from August 2019. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant registered an FIR against

¶14

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 22/02/2024 at 11:56:41

¶15

petitioner no.1 (husband), petitioner no. 2 (brother-in-law), petitioner no. 3 (mother-in-law) and petitioner no. 4 (uncle/ chacha of petitioner no. 1).

¶16

On 02.09.2023, parties arrived at a settlement before Counselling Cell, Family Court, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and as per the said settlement deed, petitioner no.1 has agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 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 02.09.2023 is on record (Annexure-C).

¶17

In terms of the said settlement, the marriage between the parties stands dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 16.11.2023, passed by Shri Vinay Kumar Khanna, Principal Judge, Family Court (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (Annexure-D). Further, as per the settlement deed, the total amount of Rs. 50,000/- has already been paid to respondent no.2.

¶18

Petitioners no. 1 to 3 and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and petitioner no. 4 is present through video conferencing and all have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer, SI Km. Jyoti, PS Hari Nagar.

¶19

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

¶20

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

¶21

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

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 22/02/2024 at 11:56:41

¶24

by observing as under:-

¶25

“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.”

¶26

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. 547/2020, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Hari Nagar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Karuna, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-02, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

¶27

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 547/2020, under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Hari Nagar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Karuna, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-02, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, is hereby quashed.

¶28

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶29

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

¶30

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶31

FEBRUARY 16, 2024 /sn

¶32

Tajinder Singh & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tajinder Singh & Ors. v. State of 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

Parveen Vs State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr.

Saurabh Bhatia and Others Vs the State and Another

Sharafat Sheikh Vs State, NCT of Delhi

Amit Pasricha & Ors. Vs NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rajesh Sharma Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Abhishek Pratap Singh & Ors. Vs the State Govt. of NCT Delhi & Anr.