Ms. Rita Gupta, Adv. with v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR

$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 560/2025 VIKAS ARORA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Rita Gupta, Adv. with petitioner in person. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.) with Ms. Priyam Aggarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kr. Arya & Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advs. SI Naresh Kumar, PS. Dabri. R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA O R D E R % 30.05.2025 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CRL.M.A. 5114/2025 (exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. W.P.(CRL) 560/2025 3. The present petition under Section 528 of the BNSS read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of FIR No. 386/2021 under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Dabri and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Vaishali Singh, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, South-West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi. 4. The marriage between the petitioner no.1/husband and the respondent 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 02/07/2025 at 01:01:54 no.2/wife was solemnized on 09.11.2008 as per Hindu Rites and Customs and one child was born out of the said wedlock. 5. Due to matrimonial differences between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2, the parties resided separately from 05.04.2020. Subsequently, respondent no.2/complainant lodged an FIR against the petitioner (husband). 6. 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 vide Settlement dated 08.12.2023 before the Principal Judge, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi and in pursuance of which respondent no. 2 has no objection, if the present FIR and the subsequent chargesheet are quashed. 7. Petitioner and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer, SI Naresh Kumar, PS. Dabri. 8. The Complainant/respondent No.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioners and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed against the petitioners. She further states that all the terms of the settlement have been complied with. 9. The matter was also placed before the learned Joint Registrar who has recorded the statement of respondent no. 2 on 17.02.205 which is as under: “Statement of Victim/R-2 On S.A. I am the R-2 in the present matter. The dispute between me and petitioner have been amicably settled as per settlement deed dated 08.12.2023 The settlement has been arrived at between myself and petitioner without any force coercion, undue influence and pressure. I have signed the settlement deed with my wish and will. Pursuant to the settlement deed dated 08.12.2023 and as per the terms of the settlement deed, entire payments have been received 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 02/07/2025 at 01:01:54 and nothing remains to be paid by petitioner. I do not want to pursue the present FIR bearing No. 386/2021 PS Dabri North, therefore, the same be quashed. I shall be bound by my statement as stated above.” 10. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Standing Counsel for the State also has no objection if the present FIR and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom including the chargesheet are quashed. 11. 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 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.” 12. 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. 386/2021 under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Dabri and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Vaishali Singh, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, South-West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi. 13. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 386/2021 under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Dabri and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the 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 02/07/2025 at 01:01:54 chargesheet pending before the court of Ms. Vaishali Singh, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, South-West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi. 14. It is however directed that this order shall not come in the way of the minor child in claiming his rights of inheritance, maintenance, educational & marriage expenses, etc. against any of the parties. 15. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 16. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. AMIT SHARMA, J MAY 30, 2025/nk/pr Click here to check corrigendum, if any