MS Kamini Kapoor & Anr. v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 28 May 2025 · 2025:DHC:4571
Girish Kathpalia
CRL.M.C. 3545/2025
2025:DHC:4571
criminal petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court quashed the FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC arising from matrimonial disputes upon amicable settlement between the parties and the complainant's decision not to pursue prosecution.

Full Text
Translation output
CRL.M.C. 3545/2025
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 28.05.2025
CRL.M.C. 3545/2025 & CRL.M.A. 15626/2025
MS KAMINI KAPOOR & ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Sachin Kaushik, Advocate
WITH
petitioner no.2 in person.
VERSUS
STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State
WITH
SI Surender Singh, PS Naraina
Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate for respondent no.2
WITH
respondent no.2 in person.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)

1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.284/2022 of PS Kirti Nagar for offences under Section 498A/406/34 IPC on the ground that they have settled all disputes with complainant de facto (respondent no.2 herein). Petitioner no.2 and respondent no.2 have personally appeared in court, duly identified by their respective counsel and Investigating Officer/SI Surender Singh. Petitioner no.1, mother-in-law of respondent no.2 is stated to be bedridden, so has not appeared. I have spoken with the parties in Hindi.

2. It is submitted by the parties that they have compromised all disputes GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2025.05.28 17:14:09 +05'30' CRL.M.C. 3545/2025 pages arising out of matrimony of petitioner no.2 and respondent no.2. Parties have decided to retain the matrimonial bond for the time being, though they would live separately. Petitioner no.2 and respondent no.2 have a son and it has been decided that his custody would continue with respondent no.2 though petitioner no.2 shall be at liberty to visit their son as and when he wants. Respondent no.2 submits that she has received back her entire stridhan. As regards maintenance, respondent no.2 submits that she does not want any money from petitioner no.2. However, parties are aware that rights of son of petitioner no.2 and respondent no.2 shall remain intact. Respondent no.2 submits that she does not want to pursue the prosecution of the petitioners.

3. Detailed statements of parties were recorded by the concerned Joint

4. Having spoken with the parties I am satisfied that it would be in the interest of justice, not to push the parties through trial.

5. Therefore, the petition is allowed and FIR No.284/2022 of PS Kirti Nagar for offences under Section 498A/406/34 IPC and proceedings arising out of the same are quashed. Pending application stands disposed of. (JUDGE) MAY 28, 2025