$~66
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 23rd September, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 4809/2019
SH. SHUBHAM BHATT ORS …..Petitioners
Through: Ms. Vaghisha Kochar, Advocate
versus
STATE ANR. …..Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, APP for State with
SI Sumit Kumar, PS Ranjit Nagar
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioners seek direction thereby
quashing FIR No. 332 dated 26th July, 2016, registered at PS Ranjit Nagar
for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/Section406/Section34 of the IPC and
consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. Notice issued.
3. Notice is accepted by learned APP for the State and respondent no. 2
and with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present petition is
taken up for final disposal.
CRL.M.C.4809/2019 Page 1 of 3
4. The petitioner and respondent no. 2 got married on 20th April, 2012 as
per Hindu rites and rituals.
5. The petitioners and respondent no.2 have with the intervention of
their well wishers and relatives entered into an amicable settlement by
mutual consent. They had started living together as husband and wife
happily and settled all their disputes amicably.
6. The respondent no. 2/complainant is present in person in the Court
and has been identified by SI Sumit Kumar of Police Station Ranjit Nagar
and submits that matter has been settled and she does not wish to prosecute
the matter any further.
7. Taking into account the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to quash
the concerned FIR as no useful purpose would be served in prosecuting the
petitioners any further.
8. For the reasons afore-recorded, the FIR No. 332 dated 26th July, 2016,
registered at PS Ranjit Nagar instituted for the offences punishable under
Sections 498A/Section406/Section34 of the IPC and consequent proceedings emanating
therefrom are quashed.
9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and disposed of.
CRL.M.C.4809/2019 Page 2 of 3
10. Order dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT)
JUDGE
SEPTEMEBR 23, 2019
v
CRL.M.C.4809/2019 Page 3 of 3
