Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.
Delhi High Court
Bharat Khatri Ors. vs State Anr. on 1 April, 2024
Author: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
Bench: Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
$~60
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 01.04.2024
+ CRL.M.C. 2540/2024
BHARAT KHATRI ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Keshav Kumar and Mr.Dinesh
Kumar Tangad, Advocates alongwith
petitioners in person.
versus
STATE ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP for the State
with SI Suresh Bhatia, PS Timarpur.
Mr.Vibhor Gaala and Ms. Disha
Arora, Advocates with respondent
No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
% JUDGMENT
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 9686/2024
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 2540/2024 CRL.M.A. 9685/2024
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. 11/2020, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at P.S.:
Timarpur and proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
CRL.M.C. 2540/2024 Page 1 of 3
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:04.04.2024
17:04:50
respondent No.2 alongwith respondent No.2 in person, appear on advance
notice and accept notice.
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 11.11.2016. A female child was born out of the wedlock.
Due to temperamental differences, respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1
started living separately. Present FIR was registered at the instance of
respondent No.2 on 11.01.2020.
4. The disputes are stated to have been amicably settled between the
parties in terms of the order dated 21.10.2023 passed by learned MM
(Mahila Court), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. It is agreed between petitioner
No.1 and respondent No.2 as stated by them that custody of the minor child
shall remain with respondent No.2 as petitioner No.1 is partially afflicted
with paralysis. 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 26.02.2024.
5. A balance amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- has been paid to respondent No.2
today through DD No.434255 dated 27.03.2024 drawn on Canara Bank,
Janakpuri, D Block, New Delhi Branch in favour of respondent No.2.
6. 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.
7. Petitioners and respondent No. 2 are present in person and have been
identified by SI Suresh Bhatia, PS: Timarpur. 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
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
CRL.M.C. 2540/2024 Page 2 of 3
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:04.04.2024
17:04:50
that nothing remains to be further adjudicated upon between the parties and
she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
8. 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. 11/2020, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC
registered at P.S.: Timarpur and the proceedings emanating therefrom stand
quashed.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also
stand disposed of.
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.
APRIL 01, 2024/v
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
CRL.M.C. 2540/2024 Page 3 of 3
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:04.04.2024
17:04:50
