A petition for quashing criminal proceedings based on a compromise must be dismissed with exemplary costs if it is discovered that the parties and their legal counsel committed fraud upon the court and state authorities through false pleadings regarding marital status.

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 173/2023 of PS Harsh Vihar for offence under Section 498A /406/34/494 IPC and Section 3 /4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and proceedings arising out of the same on the ground that the complainant de facto has compromised the disputes with them. Petitioner no.1 is the husband of complainant de facto and petitioner no.2 is mother-in law of complainant de facto. The complainant de facto has been impleaded as respondent no.2.

2. Learned APP for State assisted by Investigating Officer/SI Rahul

Ranjan accepts notice.

3. Respondent no.2 identified by the Investigating Officer and accompanied with her counsel accepts notice.

4. In view of nature of this case, I spoke with both sides in Hindi to ascertain the truth. The truth that came out is extremely shocking. The petitioners have apparently played fraud with different authorities.

5. According to the impugned FIR, petitioner no.1 came in contact with respondent no.2 through social media as he approached her with proposal to get married; and petitioner no.1 got married with respondent no.2 and got their marriage registered with the Marriage Registration Officer on 13.10.2020. Further according to the impugned FIR, in August 2021while applying for some government scheme, when the respondent no.2 used the Aadhar Card of petitioner no.1, it was revealed that petitioner no.1 had already got married earlier with one Ms. Deepa, with whom he has two children. Besides, in her FIR, respondent no.2 also raised different allegations pertaining to the offence under Section 498A /406 IPC.

6. In the course of hearing today, it came out that despite the marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 being a void act (because petitioner no.1 was already married), the marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 was also got dissolved by way of decree of divorce dated 30.08.2025 with mutual consent. It appeared as if the learned Family

Court was misled into passing the divorce decree. So, I requested both sides to show me a copy of the petition under Section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the basis whereof divorce decree (Annexure P4) was obtained. On this, counsel for petitioners stated that since the divorce petition was filed by some other counsel, he does not have copy of the same. However, learned counsel for respondent no.2 produced before me a copy of the said petition. In the said petition, marital status of petitioner no.1 has been pleaded as bachelor.

7. Further, I spoke with respondent no.2 and she stated that even she was not aware about marital status of petitioner no.1 earlier. But there is no explanation as to why respondent no.2 also signed the divorce petition which described marital status of petitioner no.1 as bachelor. Counsel for respondent no.2 appearing today, was counsel for the present respondent no.2 before the Family Court as well. Even counsel for respondent no.2 did not disclose before the Family Court about the falsehood in the divorce petition.

8. As regards counsel for petitioners, as mentioned above, learned counsel Mr. Brahm Kumar Pandey stated that the divorce petition with false pleadings was filed by some other counsel, and he does not know who filed the same. The said divorce petition, as shown by counsel for respondent no.2 had been filed by counsel for both parties to that petition. As mentioned above, counsel for wife in the said petition was the same counsel who appears today and counsel for husband was one Mr. Mohd. Zahid. The

address of Mr. Brahm Kumar Pandey, Advocate and Mr. Mohd. Zahid, Advocate is sa