Mr.Ajay Bidhuri, Advocate alongwith v. THE STATE
Case Details
Acts & Sections
Cited in this judgment
$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2138/2025 MANPREET SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Ajay Bidhuri, Advocate alongwith petitioner (through VC) versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State alongwith W/SI Chandrika, P.S.-Tilak Nagar Mr.Divjot Singh Bhatia, Mr.Aman Singh Bakhsi and Mr.Shreesh Chadha, Advocates for R-2 alongwith R-2 (through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA O R D E R % 09.05.2025 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the FIR No.42/2023 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar, and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Shruti Sharma, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. 3. The marriage between the petitioner/husband and the respondent no.2/wife was solemnized on 18.03.2018 as per Sikh Rites and Customs and no child was born out of the said wedlock. 4. Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner and respondent no. 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 01/07/2025 at 02:53:41 2, the parties resided separately since 14.08.2021. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant lodged an FIR against petitioner/husband. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, the latter has settled the matter with respondent no. 2 as recorded in the order dated 23.01.2025 passed by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, and in pursuance of which respondent no. 2 has no objection, if the present FIR and the subsequent chargesheet are quashed. 6. Petitioner and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court through video conferencing and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer and W/SI Chandrika, P.S.-Tilak Nagar. 7. The complainant/respondent No.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioner and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed. She further states that all the terms of the agreement have been complied with. 8. The matter was also placed before the learned Joint Registrar on 02.05.2025 who has recorded the statement of respondent No.2 which is reproduced as under:- “Statement of Mr. Divjot Singh Bhatia, Advocate, D-2064/2017, Office At Q-13A, Lower Ground Floor, Jangpura Extn. At Bar I am the counsel for Respondent no. 2 namely Ms. Satinder Kaur. My vakalatnama on behalf of R-2 is on record. I identify Respondent no. 2 who is appearing through VC. I have instructions to state on behalf of Respondent no. 2 that FIR No. 042/2023, Under Section 498-A/406/34 IPG, was registered at PS Tilak Nagar, Delhi against the petitioner in which charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner. I have instructions to state on behalf of Respondent no. 2 that, Respondent no. 2/complainant has voluntarily and without 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 01/07/2025 at 02:53:41 any pressure or coercion from anyone and after obtaining due legal advice settled all her issues and disputes with the petitioner and out of her free will, based on which the Hon’ble Federal Court of Australia has been pleased to pass a consent order dated 23.01.2025, which is on record as Annexure C from page 104 onwards. As per the settlement, 1 have instructions to state on behalf of Respondent no. 2 that she has received entire settlement amount of $ 80,000 $35,000 AUD totaling to approximately Rs. 61,75,500/-. I have instructions to state that Respondent no. 2 has no objections, if the FIR No. 042/2023, Under Section 498-A/406/34 IPG, registered at PS Tilak Nagar, Delhi and all proceedings emanating there from are quashed against all the petitioners. The settlement amount received by Respondent no. 2 is towards her entire alimony and maintenance and she shall not claim anything in this regard in future by way of any litigation. Further, Respondent no. 2 undertakes to abide by all terms of the consent order. There is no child born out of the wedlock. The parties have already tiled proceedings for divorce by mutual consent and Respondent no. 2 shall fully cooperate in the same till second motion proceedings. She is aware of the legal consequences which may ensue if she does not cooperate in quashing of the abovesaid FIR or till the second motion of the divorce proceedings. This is my true statement being made voluntarily on the instructions received from Respondent no. 2 in her presence (Through VC) without any ill will or favour towards anyone.” 9. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the chargesheet are quashed. 10. In Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by 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 01/07/2025 at 02:53:41 observing as under:- “61. ... In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.” 11. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and the fact that the parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No.42/2023 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Shruti Sharma, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. 12. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No.42/2023 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Shruti Sharma, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, are hereby quashed, 13. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 14. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. AMIT SHARMA, J MAY 9, 2025/dy/pr Click here to check corrigendum, if any
$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2138/2025 MANPREET SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Ajay Bidhuri, Advocate alongwith petitioner (through VC) versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State alongwith W/SI Chandrika, P.S.-Tilak Nagar Mr.Divjot Singh Bhatia, Mr.Aman Singh Bakhsi and Mr.Shreesh Chadha, Advocates for R-2 alongwith R-2 (through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA O R D E R % 09.05.2025 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the FIR No.42/2023 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar, and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Shruti Sharma, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. 3. The marriage between the petitioner/husband and the respondent no.2/wife was solemnized on 18.03.2018 as per Sikh Rites and Customs and no child was born out of the said wedlock. 4. Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner and respondent no. 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 01/07/2025 at 02:53:41 2, the parties resided separately since 14.08.2021. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant lodged an FIR against petitioner/husband. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, the latter has settled the matter with respondent no. 2 as recorded in the order dated 23.01.2025 passed by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, and in pursuance of which respondent no. 2 has no objection, if the present FIR and the subsequent chargesheet are quashed. 6. Petitioner and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court through video conferencing and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer and W/SI Chandrika, P.S.-Tilak Nagar. 7. The complainant/respondent No.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioner and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed. She further states that all the terms of the agreement have been complied with. 8. The matter was also placed before the learned Joint Registrar on 02.05.2025 who has recorded the statement of respondent No.2 which is reproduced as under:- “Statement of Mr. Divjot Singh Bhatia, Advocate, D-2064/2017, Office At Q-13A, Lower Ground Floor, Jangpura Extn. At Bar I am the counsel for Respondent no. 2 namely Ms. Satinder Kaur. My vakalatnama on behalf of R-2 is on record. I identify Respondent no. 2 who is appearing through VC. I have instructions to state on behalf of Respondent no. 2 that FIR No. 042/2023, Under Section 498-A/406/34 IPG, was registered at PS Tilak Nagar, Delhi against the petitioner in which charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner. I have instructions to state on behalf of Respondent no. 2 that, Respondent no. 2/complainant has voluntarily and without 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 01/07/2025 at 02:53:41 any pressure or coercion from anyone and after obtaining due legal advice settled all her issues and disputes with the petitioner and out of her free will, based on which the Hon’ble Federal Court of Australia has been pleased to pass a consent order dated 23.01.2025, which is on record as Annexure C from page 104 onwards. As per the settlement, 1 have instructions to state on behalf of Respondent no. 2 that she has received entire settlement amount of $ 80,000 $35,000 AUD totaling to approximately Rs. 61,75,500/-. I have instructions to state that Respondent no. 2 has no objections, if the FIR No. 042/2023, Under Section 498-A/406/34 IPG, registered at PS Tilak Nagar, Delhi and all proceedings emanating there from are quashed against all the petitioners. The settlement amount received by Respondent no. 2 is towards her entire alimony and maintenance and she shall not claim anything in this regard in future by way of any litigation. Further, Respondent no. 2 undertakes to abide by all terms of the consent order. There is no child born out of the wedlock. The parties have already tiled proceedings for divorce by mutual consent and Respondent no. 2 shall fully cooperate in the same till second motion proceedings. She is aware of the legal consequences which may ensue if she does not cooperate in quashing of the abovesaid FIR or till the second motion of the divorce proceedings. This is my true statement being made voluntarily on the instructions received from Respondent no. 2 in her presence (Through VC) without any ill will or favour towards anyone.” 9. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the chargesheet are quashed. 10. In Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by 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 01/07/2025 at 02:53:41 observing as under:- “61. ... In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.” 11. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and the fact that the parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No.42/2023 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Shruti Sharma, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. 12. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No.42/2023 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Shruti Sharma, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, are hereby quashed, 13. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 14. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. AMIT SHARMA, J MAY 9, 2025/dy/pr Click here to check corrigendum, if any