Quashed

Bram Dev @ Braham Dev & Ors. v. the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC13 Dec 2024CRL.M.C./5644/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court quashed FIR No. 0298/2016 registered under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 of the IPC. The parties had settled on payment of Rs. 1.70 lakhs, which was paid. The Court found no pending disputes and held that quashing would secure the ends of justice.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 0298/2016 under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC, and all proceedings therefrom, are quashed.

Bram Dev @ Braham Dev & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~65

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 5644/2024

¶4

BRAM DEV @ BRAHAM DEV & ORS.

.....Petitioner

Through:

versus

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

¶9

.....Respondent

¶10

Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP SI Dharmveer, Ps Chhawla Ms. Manisha Shokeen, Ms. Seema Ladwal, Advs.

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R % 13.12.2024

¶12

This is a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of FIR No. 0298/2016, under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Chhawla and proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶13

It is stated that the parties have arrived at a settlement dated 08.08.2024 pursuant to which the petitioner had to pay a total sum of Rs.1,70,000/- lakhs to respondent No. 2 which has already been paid.

¶14

Petitioner is present in Court and has been identified by his counsel, Mr. Amandeep Rana.

¶15

Ms. Manisha Shokeen, learned counsel appears for respondent no. 2 and states that respondent no. 2 has recently given birth to a baby girl and hence, is unable to appear through video conference mode.

¶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 19/12/2024 at 12:57:08

¶17

She has drawn my attention to the Vakalatnama in her favour which is duly signed by respondent no. 2 and states that the settlement is binding and she on behalf of her client has no objection if the FIR is quashed.

¶18

There is no child born out of the wedlock between the petitioner and respondent no. 2.

¶19

Since the parties have arrived at a settlement and no disputes are pending, I am convinced that quashing of such proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and would secure ends of justice. The Court does not see any fruitful purpose if criminal proceedings are permitted to be prosecuted any further. It is a fit case for quashing.

¶20

In this view of the matter, FIR No. 0298/2016, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Chhawla and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.

¶21

The petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶22

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶23

DECEMBER 13, 2024/sp

¶24

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶25

Bram Dev @ Braham Dev & Ors. v. the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bram Dev @ Braham Dev & 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mayank Kapoor Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Manish Kumar Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Sangeeta Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Joni & Anr. Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi ) & Anr.

Sandeep Rathi & Ors. Vs State G.N.C.T of Delhi & Anr.

Shahid Vs the State N.C.T. of Delhi