Allowed

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

Delhi HC22 Jan 2024CRL.M.C./506/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC in a matrimonial dispute. The court held that since the parties had settled, divorce was granted, and the settlement amount was paid, continuing criminal proceedings served no useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 476/2020 under Sections 498A/406 IPC and all consequential proceedings are quashed.

Davinder Kumar & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~60

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 506/2024 & CRL.M.A. 1996/2024 (Exemption)

¶4

DAVINDER KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Sudhir Anand, Advocate alongwith petitioners in person.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State. SI Neeraj, PS KNK Marg. Ms. Shalini Gupta, Advocate for R2 alongwith R-2 in person.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶8

O R D E R % 22.01.2024

¶9

The present petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeks quashing of FIR No. 476/2020, under Sections 498A/406 of the IPC, registered at PS KNK Marg, Delhi and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet filed and pending before the Court of Ms. Preeti, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-01, North District, Rohini Court, New Delhi.

¶10

The marriage between the petitioner no.1/husband and the respondent no.2/wife was solemnized on 25.10.2016 as per Hindu Rites and Customs and one female child was born out of the said wedlock.

¶11

Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2, the parties resided separately. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant registered an FIR against petitioner no. 1 (husband),

¶12

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 15/06/2024 at 11:27:29

¶13

petitioner no. 2 (father-in-law), petitioner no. 3 (mother-in-law) and petitioner no. 4 (sister-in-law).

¶14

On 28.11.2022, parties arrived at a settlement before Counselling Cell, Family Courts, North Rohini Courts, Delhi, and as per the said settlement deed, petitioner no.1 has agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- 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.

¶15

In terms of the said settlement, the marriage between the parties stands dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 18.05.2023, passed by Ms. Nivedita Anil Sharma, Principal Judge, Family Court, North, Rohini Courts, Delhi (Annexure P-5). Further, as per the settlement deed, the settlement amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- has already been paid to respondent no.2. As per the said settlement, custody of the minor child will be with the respondent no. 2 and the petitioner no. 1 will have no visitation rights.

¶16

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 Neeraj, PS KNK Marg. 7. 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 against the petitioners. She further states that all the terms of the settlement have been complied with.

¶17

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

¶18

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes

¶19

¶20

by observing as under:-

¶21

“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 proceedings.”

¶22

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. 476/2020, under Sections 498A/406 of the IPC, registered at PS KNK Marg, Delhi and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet filed and pending before the Court of Ms. Preeti, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-01, North District, Rohini Court, New Delhi.

¶23

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 476/2020, under Sections 498A/406 of the IPC, registered at PS KNK Marg, Delhi and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet filed and pending before the Court of Ms. Preeti, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-01, North District, Rohini Court, New Delhi, is hereby quashed.

¶24

It is however directed that this order shall not come in the way of the minor child in claiming her rights of inheritance, maintenance, educational & marriage expenses, etc. against any of the parties.

¶25

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶26

¶27

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

¶28

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶29

JANUARY 22, 2024 /sn

¶30

This is a digitally signed order.

¶31

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 15/06/2024 at 11:27:29

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Davinder 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

Akshay Vs State

Rachana Agarwal Vs Keltech Infrastructure Limited

Rachana Agarwal Vs Keltech Infrastructure Limited

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

Mr. Rohit Sharma Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Raj Pal Vs State of N.C.T. of Delhi