* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 09.08.2018
+ CRL.M.C. 3567/2018
RAHUL ORS ….. Petitioners
THE STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) ORS ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Ms.Manisha Rawat, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr.Raghuvinder Verma, APP for the
State with ASI Jai Kishan, P.S.Mangolpuri
Mr.Sunil Chaudhary, Adv.for R-2 along with
respondent No.2 in person.
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl. M.A. 28125/2018(exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.1748 of 2014 under
Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Police Station Mangolpuri, based on a
settlement. It is contended that the FIR was lodged consequent to a
CRL.M.C. 3567/2018 Page 1 of 3
2. As per the settlement, a total sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- was agreed
to be paid to respondent no. 2 besides certain articles which were to be
3. Learned counsel for the parties inform that Rs.1,50,000/- has
already been paid and some of the articles have been returned,
however, some articles were damaged for which an additional amount
of Rs.5000/- is being paid. Balance amount of Rs.55,000/- has also
been paid to respondent No.2 today in cash. Respondent No.2
acknowledges the receipt of the said amount of Rs. 50,000/- and the
additional compensation of Rs.5000/-.
4. As per the settlement, custody of minor son is to remain with
respondent No.2. The petitioner who is present in Court in person
undertakes that he shall not claim rights contrary to the settlement
terms. Undertaking is accepted.
5. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have
settled their disputes and have amicably dissolved their marriage by
mutual consent and decree of divorce dated 19.05.2018 has been
passed. It is further submitted on behalf of the parties that parties had
entered into the settlement before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini
Courts, New Delhi dated 25.11.2017.
6. Learned counsels for the parties inform that other disputes
between the parties have also been resolved and proceedings have
CRL.M.C. 3567/2018 Page 2 of 3
been concluded on the basis of the subject settlement.
7. Respondent no. 2 who is present in court in person and
represented by counsel, is identified by the IO. Respondent no. 2
submits that she has settled the dispute with the petitioners and is
agreeable to the settlement and does not wish to press the criminal
charges against the petitioners any further.
8. In view of the fact that the disputes between the petitioner and
respondent no. 2 emanate out of a matrimonial discord and have been
settled, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in
futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the
parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of
justice being the ultimate guiding factor. It would be expedient to
quash the subject FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating
9. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.1748 of
2014 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Police Station Mangolpuri,
and the consequent proceedings there from are, accordingly quashed.
10. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
AUGUST 09, 2018/rk
CRL.M.C. 3567/2018 Page 3 of 3