Satya Prakash & ORS v. State ( Govt Of NCT Of Delhi) & ANR
$~42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + SATYA PRAKASH & ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by:
Mr.Tarun Shokeen and Mr.Sujit Beniwal, Advocates versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by:
Ms.Richa Kapoor, ASC for the State with Ms.Amita Sachdeva, Advocate and SI Md.Imteyaz Alam, PS Shahbad Dairy
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 26.09.2018 1.
By this petition, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.940/2017 under Sections 323/354/509/506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC registered at PS Shahbad Dairy on the complaint of respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter. 2.
Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on instructions submits that in the above noted FIR besides the four petitioners impleaded in the memo of parties two other accused have also been made parties and the respondent No.2 is the only complainant/victim. 3.
Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioners has handed over amended memo of parties impleading all the six accused as
petitioners.
4.
Respondent No.2 who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel and Investigating Officer states that she has settled the matter with the petitioners. In terms of the settlement marriage between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2/complainant has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. As full and final settlement of all the claims, that is, maintenance, streedhan and alimony etc. of the respondent No.2, the petitioner No.1 has to pay a sum of ₹15 lakhs to respondent No.2 out of which she has already received a sum of ₹10 lakhs and the balance amount of ₹5 lakhs has been received by her today in Court vide Demand Draft No.145628 drawn on State Bank of India. She states that she has also received the cost of `5,000/- imposed vide order dated 19th September, 2018. She further states that she has no claim whatsoever remaining against the petitioners. In terms of the settlement she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. 5.
Petitioners who are present in Court and are identified by the learned counsel affirm the statement of respondent No.2 and undertake to abide by the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties. 6.
In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.
7.
Consequently, FIR No.940/2017 under Sections 323/354/509/506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC registered at PS Shahbad Dairy and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
8.
Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.
9.
Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 mamta