Allowed

She Suresh Kumar Pathak and Ors. v. Thestate(Govt. Ofnctofdelhi) and Anr.

Delhi HC22 Aug 2024CRL.M.C./6532/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR registered under Sections 498-A, 406, and 34 IPC. The court held that with mediated settlements and reconciliation, continuing proceedings was futile. The petition was allowed subject to payment of costs by the parties within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 47/2016 and all proceedings quashed; costs of Rs. 7,500 each to Friendicoes SECA directed to be paid within 02 weeks.

She Suresh Kumar Pathak and Ors. Vs Thestate(Govt… — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~57

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 6532/2024

¶4

SHE SURESH KUMAR PATHAK AND ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Rohit Singh, Mr. Prince Kumar, Mr. Vikram Singh Nayal and Mr. Naveen Kumar, Advocates for P-1 to P-3.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE(GOVT. OFNCTOFDELHI) AND ANR

¶7

.....Respondents Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for the State with SI Paramjeet, P.S.: Ranhola. Mr. Sujit Kumar, Mr. Mohit Saini and Ms. Kanika Saini, Advocates for R-2.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 22.08.2024 CRL.M.A. 24980/2024 (exemption)

¶9

Exemption granted, subject to just exceptions.

¶10

Let requisite compliances be made within 01 week.

¶11

The application stands disposed-of.

¶12

CRL.M.C. 6532/2024

¶13

By way of the present petition filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, the petitioners, who are the husband and in-laws of the complainant/respondent No. 2, seek quashing of case FIR No. 47/2016 dated 15.01.2016 registered under sections 498-A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) at P.S.: Ranhola, Delhi. Consequent upon completion of investigation, the

¶14

CRL.M.C. 6532/2024

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶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 31/08/2024 at 11:31:51

¶17

offence under section 506 IPC has also been added against the petitioners vide c hargesheet dated 01.02.2017.

¶18

The petition is premised on 02 settlements, the first is a Mediated Settlement dated 31.10.2017, and the second is another Mediated Settlement dated 22.09.2023, both arrived at through mediation under the aegis of Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. The parties are stated to have resolved their disputes amicably; and respondent No.2 confirms that she has been co-habiting with petitioner No.1 after they had reconciled on or about 14.02.2017.

¶19

The petition is supported by affidavits of the petitioners, as also of respondent No. 2, alongwith proofs of their I.D.s.

¶20

The petitioners as well as respondent No. 2 have joined via videoconferencing. Their credentials have been verified and they have also been identified by their respective counsel.

¶21

The court has interacted with the petitioners, as also with respondent No. 2, who have confirmed that they have now resolved the matter and that the aforesaid 02 mediated settlements have been signed by them closing all issues amicably. Parties now wish to live in peace and harmony going forward.

¶22

Ms. Shubhi Gupta, learned APP confirms that the State has no objection to the subject FIR being quashed.

¶23

In the circumstances, in line with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2012) 10 SCC 303 as also in Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466, this court sees no reason why the subject FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom should not be

CRL.M.C. 6532/2024

Page 2 of 3

quashed. This court is of the view that in light of the settlements between the contesting parties, continuing with the subject FIR and all subsequent proceedings would be an exercise in futility and would not be conducive to peace and harmony between the parties.

¶28

Though the court is agreeable to quashing the subject FIR, it is noticed that the parties have let the proceedings in the matter linger for about 07 years despite the fact that they had signed their first mediated settlement on 31.10.2017.

¶29

Accordingly, while allowing the petition, this court considers it appropriate, that by way of atonement, petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 shall pay costs of Rs.7,500/- each to Friendicoes SECA, No.271 & 273, Defence Colony Flyover Market, Jungpura, New Delhi within 02 weeks.

¶30

Subject to the aforesaid condition, case FIR No. 47/2016 dated 15.01.2016 registered under sections 498-A/406/34 IPC at P.S.: Ranhola, Delhi is quashed. All proceedings arising therefrom also stand closed.

¶31