Neeraj Singhal v. The State Of Delhi & ANR

$-9 & *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1772/2015 NEERAJ SINGHAL & ORS Petitioners Through Mr. S C Singhal, Advocate versus THE STATE OF DELHI & ANR Respondents Through Mr. R S Kundu, ASC for the State SI Arvind Kumar, CAW Cell (E) AND + CRL.M.C. 2074/2016 NEERAJ SINGHAL Petitioner Through Mr. S C Singhal, Advocate versus THE STATE OF DELHI & ANR Respondents Through Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State Insp. Jaswinder Singh, LOW Cell

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

ORDER

% 28.07.2016 On the complaint of respondent No.2, following two FIRs were registered:

..

(A).

FIR No. 61/2013 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPG at Police Station Anand Vihar, Delhi.

(B).

FIR No. 182/2013 under Sections 66/66C at Police Station LOW Cell, Delhi.

Petitioner Neeraj Singhal and respondent No. 2, Ms. Sanchya Singhal were married on 09.02.2012; their relations became strained, which led to Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

registration of the above FIRs.

As regards FIR under Sections 66/66C I.T. Act is concerned, complainant has alleged that her laptop and mobile were in custody of petitioner, Shri Neeraj Singhal in the third week of November, 2012 and during that period, he had hacked her ID.

Petitioner Neeraj Singhal and respondent No.2 - Ms. Sanchya Singhal have settled their disputes vide Compromise/Memorandum of Understanding dated 15.02.2013 and Supplement Compromise Deed-cumSettlement/Memorandum of Understanding dated 23.08.2014, photocopies whereof have been placed on record. It is submitted that marriage of Shri Neeraj Singhal and Ms. Sanchya Singhal has already been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent, on 11.05.2016. Ms. Sanchya Singhal is present in Court along with with her counsel and has also been identified by Inspector Jaswinder Singh of EOW Cell. She states that she has received the entire settled amount and has no objection if FIRs are quashed.

She further submits that if any liability falls on her, on account of the use of her laptop/mobile by the petitioner during the third week of November, 2012, the same shall be the responsibility of Shri Neeraj Singhal. Counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that petitioner no.l consents to taking such liability upon himself. Shri Neeraj Singhal shall remain bound by this statement. Keeping in mind that the parties have settled their disputes and thier marraige has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent, no useful purpose will be served to keep entangled in the above criminal proceedings.

Accordingly, both the FIRs and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

The petitions are disposed of in the above terms. Dasti.

A.K. ATHAK, J.

JULY 28, 2016 P