Sanjay & ORS v. State (NCT Of Delhi) & ANR

$~63 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 2372/2018 SANJAY & ORS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. D.D. Pandey and Mr. Rohit Gupta, Advs.

versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents Through:

Ms. Neelam Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI Dheer Singh Mr. V.S. Dubey and Mr. Mohd.

Faizan, Advs. for R-2 with R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

O R D E R

% 07.05.2018 Crl. M.A. No. 8455/2018 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 2372/2018 1.

The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 437 of 2014 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC Police Station Faras Bazar, New Delhi, based on a settlement. It is contended that the FIR was lodged consequent to a matrimonial discord.

2.

Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have settled their disputes and have amicably dissolved their marriage by mutual consent and decree of divorce dated 21.03.2018 has been passed. It is further submitted on behalf of the parties that parties had entered into a settlement before Counselling Cell, Karkardoom Courts, Delhi on 10.07.2017. As per the CRL.M.C. 2372/2018

settlement, a total sum of Rs. 3 lakhs has been agreed to be paid to respondent no. 2. A sum of Rs. 2 lakhs has already been paid and the balance sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been paid to respondent no. 2 by way of Demand Draft No. 308983 dated 27.04.2018 issued by Central Bank of India today in the Court. 3.

It is further agreed between the parties that the permanent custody of the minor child shall remain with respondent no. 2. The petitioner who is present in Court undertakes that he shall not claim any rights contrary to the settlement terms. The undertaking is accepted. 4.

Respondent no. 2 is present in court in person, represented by her counsel and is identified by the Investigating Officer. She submits that she has settled the dispute with the petitioners and is agreeable to the settlement and does not wish to press criminal charges against the petitioners any further. 5.

In view of the fact that the disputes between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 emanate out of a matrimonial discord and have been settled, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. It would be expedient to quash the subject FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.

6.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 437 of 2014 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC Police Station Faras Bazar, New Delhi and the consequent proceedings therefrom are, accordingly quashed. 7.

Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master. SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MAY 07, 2018/'rs'

CRL.M.C. 2372/2018