CRL.M.C.1034/2021 Page 1 of 6

$~3

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of decision: 28.04.2021

+

CRL.M.C. 1034/2021 & Crl.M.As. 5259-60/2021

MR. VIVEK KUMAR YADAV

..... Petitioner

Through:

Ms. Amrita Mishra & Ms.Ritu Yadav,

Advocates

Versus

STATE & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. G.M. Farooqui, Additional Public

Prosecutor for respondent No.1/State

with SI Faizan Ghani

Respondent No.2 in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

J U D G M E N T (oral)

The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.

1.

The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking

quashing of FIR No. 150/2018, registered at police station Shakarpur, Delhi

for the offences under Sections 376(2) (n)/323 IPC.

2.

Notice issued.

3.

Mr. G.M.Farooqui, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for

respondent No.1/State accepts notice. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor

for State submits that respondent No.2 is present through video conferencing

CRL.M.C.1034/2021 Page 2 of 6

and she has been identified as the complainant of FIR in question by the

Investigating Officer of this case, who is also present through video

conferencing.

4.

With the consent of both the sides, the present petition has been taken

up for hearing and disposal.

5.

The crux of the prosecution case, as noted in the charge-sheet filed in

this case, is that petitioner and respondent No.2, who is the complainant of

FIR in question, studied in same college in Jaipur, Rajasthan and became

friends in the year 2013. After some time, their friendship turned into love

affair and they entered into physical relationship many times till the year

2017. As per the complainant, petitioner made physical relations with her on

the pretext of marrying her, however, after some time he refused to marry

her with the lame excuse that his family was not ready for their marriage.

Aggrieved

with

petitioner’s

refusal

to

marry

her,

respondent

No.2/complainant filed a complaint against him, which culminated in the

FIR in question.

6.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner on the ground that

with the intervention of respectable members of the society, the subject

matter

of

this

FIR

stands

amicably

resolved

with

respondent

CRL.M.C.1034/2021 Page 3 of 6

No.2/complainant in terms of Deed of Settlement dated 12.02.2021.

7.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that both the sides have moved

on in their lives and in fact, respondent No.2 has recently got engaged to

some other person and is likely to get married soon. It is submitted that both

the sides have decided to give quietus to their inter se dispute and therefore,

in the interest of justice, the present petition be allowed.

8.

Respondent No.2, who is present through video conferencing, has

affirmed the factum of having resolved the subject matter of this FIR with

petitioner in terms of Deed of Settlement dated 12.02.2021 as also contents

of her affidavit dated 20.02.2021 filed in support of this petition.

9.

Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Crl. Appeal 233/2021

[arising out of SLP (Crl. No. 11218 of 2019], titled as Sonu @ Subhash

Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. against an order of dismissal of

application, where accused had refused to marry the complainant despite

having been in physical relationship and promised to marry her, while

referring to the principles enunciated in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Vs.

State of Maharashtra (2019) 9 SCC 608 observed as under:-

CRL.M.C.1034/2021 Page 4 of 6

“Where the promise to marry is false and the

10.

Th