AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 235 wordsGirish Kathpalia, J
Petitioners seek quashing of case FIR No. 322/2016 of Police Station Harsh Vihar for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act on the ground that the respondent no. 2 (complainant de facto) has compromised the disputes with the petitioners.
State has no objection to this petition.
The respondent no.2 is present in court today and is identified by IO/SI Rahul Ranjan of PS Harsh Vihar.
I have spoken with respondent no.2 in Hindi and it is stated by her that she has compromised all disputes with the petitioners. It is stated by respondent no.2 that since the year 2017, she is living with the petitioners happily and has no complaint against any of them. It is also stated by her that two children were born from her wedlock with petitioner no. 1 and both of them are living with them. Under these circumstances, respondent no.2 submits that she does not wish to continue prosecution of petitioners.
Having spoken with respondent no.2, I am satisfied that it would be in the interest of justice not to push the parties through a full dress trial.
Therefore, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 322/2016 of Police Station Harsh Vihar for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act as well as proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.