Quashed

Akhilesh Kumar Bhadoria & Ors. v. State & Anr.

Delhi HC4 Sept 2024CRL.M.C./965/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition for quashing an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC filed by a husband against his wife. The court noted the marriage had been dissolved via mutual consent divorce. Parties reached an amicable settlement with payment made to the wife. Considering the settlement and bleak prospects of conviction, the court held no useful purpose would be served by keeping the case pending.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 0091/2011 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and proceedings emanating therefrom quashed.

Akhilesh Kumar Bhadoria & Ors. Vs State & Anr. — Domestic Violence | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~66

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 04.09.2024

¶4

- CRL.M.C. 965/2024

¶5

AKHILESH KUMAR BHADORIA & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶6

Through: Mr. Praveen Singh, Mr. Durgesh Nandini and Mr. Sandip Kumar, Advocates with petitioners in-person.

¶7

versus

¶8

STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State with SI Sukhvir Singh, PS: Mandawli. Ms. Naiem J. Heena (DHCLSC) and Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocates for R-2 with R-2-in-person.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA

¶11

% J U D G M E N T

¶12

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)

¶13

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. 0091/2011, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered at PS: Mandawli Fazalpur, East Delhi and proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶14

2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 along with respondent No. 2 in person appear on advance notice and accept notice.

¶15

3. In brief, as per the case of the petitioners, marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was solemnized according to Hindu Rites and ceremonies on 02.02.2006. A female child was born out of the wedlock, who

¶16

Signature Not Verified

¶17

CRL.M.C. 965/2024

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:0 9.09.2024 13:02:24

¶20

is presently in custody of respondent No. 2. Due to matrimonial differences, petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 started living separately. On complaint of respondent No. 2, present FIR was registered on 08.03.2011.

¶21

4. The disputes are stated to have been initially settled between the parties in terms of Settlement Deed dated 16.07.2014 arrived at Counselling Cell, Family Court, East Vishwas Nagar, Delhi, whereby, respondent No. 2 undertook to render assistance for purpose of quashing of present FIR. However, since respondent No. 2 did not cooperate for purpose of quashing of aforesaid FIR, a subsequent agreement was further entered into between parties vide Settlement Deed dated 17.02.2020, whereby, petitioner agreed to pay an additional amount of Rs. 50,000/- for purpose of settlement. The marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 has been dissolved by decree of divorce by way of mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act vide judgment dated 24.08.2015.

¶22

5. An amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- has been paid to respondent No. 2 today through DD No. 505498 dated 10.08.2024 drawn on ICICI Bank, Janakpuri, Delhi in favour of respondent No. 2.

¶23

6. Respondent No. 2, who is present in person along with her counsel, submits that she has no further grievance in this regard and has no objection to quashing of FIR in terms of settlement between the parties.

¶24

7. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement between the parties, she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

¶25

8. Petitioners and respondent No. 2 are present in person and have been identified by SI Sukhvir Singh, PS: Mandawli. I have interacted with the parties and they confirm that the matter has been amicably settled between

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

CRL.M.C. 965/2024

¶28

Page 2 of 3

¶29

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:0 9.09.2024 13:02:24

¶30

them without any threat, pressure or coercion. Respondent No. 2 also states that nothing remains to be further adjudicated upon between the parties.

¶31

9. 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. The chances of conviction are bleak in view of amicable settlement between the parties. Consequently, FIR No. 0091/2011, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered at PS: Mandawli Fazalpur, East Delhi and proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed.

¶32

Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶33

A copy of this order be forwarded to learned Trial Court for information.

¶34

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J

¶35

SEPTEMBER 04, 2024/ R

¶36

Signature Not Verified

¶37

CRL.M.C. 965/2024

¶38

Page 3 of 3

¶39

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:0 9.09.2024 13:02:24

Akhilesh Kumar Bhadoria & Ors. v. State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhilesh Kumar Bhadoria & Ors. v. State & 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

Wasim Khan Vs State NCT of Delhi

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

Anil Kumar Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Ajay Singla Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Gautam Arya & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sagar @ Katto Vs the State (N.C.T.) Delhi