$~67 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 05.09.2024 + CRL.M.C. 7008/2024 MANOJ DUA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Himanshu, Advocate with petitioners in-person.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP with SI Anu Pundir, CAW Cell, South West District and SI Naresh, PS: Shahdara.

Mr. K. P. Singh, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA % O R D E R ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)

CRL.M.A. 26744/2024 Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 7008/2024

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. 0243/2020, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, registered at PS: Shahdara and proceedings emanating therefrom. Chargesheet has been filed under Sections 354/354A/

498A/406/506/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 along with respondent No. 2 in person appear on advance Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 7008/2024 Page 1 of 4 Digitally Signed 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 08.09.2013. A male child was born out of the wedlock, who is presently in custody of respondent No. 2. Due to matrimonial differences, petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 started living separately. On complaint of respondent No. 2, present FIR was registered on 13.08.2020.

4. The disputes are stated to have been initially settled between the parties in terms of Settlement Deed dated 05.10.2023. 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 21.05.2024.

5. An amount of Rs. 3,10,000/- has been paid to respondent No. 2 today through DD No. 548998 dated 28.08.2024 drawn on Union Bank, Alwar, Rajasthan in favour of respondent No. 2.

6. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement between the parties, she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

7. Petitioners in the present case seek to invoke the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The same is to be used to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court. In which cases, the power to quash the criminal proceedings or the complaint or FIR may be used when the offender as well as victim have settled their dispute, would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case and no generalized list or categories can be prescribed. However, the Court is required to give due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence and consider the impact on the Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 7008/2024 Page 2 of 4 Digitally Signed society.

8. It may also be observed that heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot be appropriately quashed despite settlement. However, distinguished from serious offences, the offences which have predominant element of civil dispute or offences involving minor incidents, where the complainant / victim also stands compensated for loss, if any, stand on a different footing, so far as exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is concerned. The High Court also is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether there is sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving the charge for the offence charged with. It may also be assessed, if in view of compromise between the parties, the possibility of conviction in such a case is remote and whether continuation of proceedings would c