Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR in matrimonial dispute allowed as matter resolved amicably post-divorce. Court quashed proceedings to prevent abuse of process.
FIR No. 1182/2018 under Sections 489A/406/34 IPC and proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~94
versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP with SI Monu, PS: Mangolpuri and IO / ASI Ram Charan. Mr. Akash Srivastava, Advocate for R-2 with Respondent No. 2-in-person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
% J U D G M E N T
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 1656/2024
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 421/2024
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. 1182/2018 under Sections 489A/406/34 IPC registered at P.S.: Mangolpuri, Delhi and proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 alongwith respondent No. 2 in person appear on advance notice and accept notice.
Signature Not Verified
Page 1 of 3
CRL.M.C. 421/2024
Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 6.02.2024 15:18:50
3. In brief, as per the case of the petitioner, marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was solemnized according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 10.12.2012. No child is stated to be born out of the wedlock. Due to temperamental differences, respondent No. 2 and petitioner No. 1 could not live together and have been living separately since August, 2017. On complaint of respondent No. 2, present FIR was registered.
4. The matter is stated to have been amicably resolved between the parties in terms of settlement deed dated 26.08.2022. The marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 is stated to have been dissolved by decree of divorce by way of mutual consent under Section 13B(1) and 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
5. 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.
6. Petitioners as well as respondent No. 2 are present in-person in the Court today and have been identified by ASI Ram Charan, PS: Mangolpuri. 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 she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
7. 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. 1182/2018 under Sections 489A/406/34 IPC registered at P.S.: Mangolpuri, Delhi and proceedings emanating therefrom
Signature Not Verified
Page 2 of 3
CRL.M.C. 421/2024
Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 6.02.2024 15:18:50
stand quashed.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. A copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned Trial Court for information.
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.
JANUARY 18, 2024 /R
Signature Not Verified
Page 3 of 3
CRL.M.C. 421/2024
Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 6.02.2024 15:18:50
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR and proceedings should be quashed in light of an amicable settlement between the parties and divorce by mutual consent.
Naveen and Others
The State NCT of Delhi
Respondent No. 2
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
