High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/982/2017

Shaeed @ Mohd Saeed & ORS v. State (Govt Of NCT Of Delhi) & ANR

2017-03-30Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vipin Sanghi2 pages

$~40.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 982/2017 SHAEED @ MOHD SAEED & ORS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Arjun Gadhoke & Md. Qamar Ali, Advocates.

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

Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel and Mr.Jamal Akhtar, Advocate along with SI Ompal Singh, PS-Gokul Puri, for the State.

Ms. Shiv Kumari, Advocate for and along with respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

O R D E R

% 30.03.2017 The petitioners have filed the present petition seeking quashing of FIR No.410/2015 registered on the complaint of the complainant under Sections 498A/ 406/ 34 IPC against the petitioners at Police Station - Gokul Puri. The complainant/ respondent No.2 is present in Court. She is identified by the Investigating Officer.

The parties have arrived at a settlement on 18.02.2016 in mediation, which has been placed on record. Under the settlement, out of the total

settlement amount of Rs.2.5 Lakhs, the complainant has already received an amount of Rs.1.5 Lakhs. An amount of Rs.1 Lakh, in cash, has been tendered to her in Court today.

Respondent No.2 states that the amount of Rs.2.5 Lakhs agreed to in mediation is meagre and it would not suffice to take care of, or maintain the minor child born out of the wedlock.

The petitioner, who is present in Court, has agreed to and undertaken that he shall pay Rs.5,000/- each month for a period of 12 months in the form of Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) made in the name of the minor child under the guardianship of respondent No.2 on a nationalised bank. Each of these FDRs shall be made for a period of three years. The first FDR shall be delivered by the petitioner No.1 to respondent No.2 by 30.04.2017, and the subsequent FDRs shall be made by the fifteenth day of each calendar month. The FDRs shall be delivered to respondent No.2 through the I.O. The complainant states that she has not been subjected to any pressure or coercion and that she has entered the settlement out of her own free will. The complainant further states that she joins the prayer for quashing of the FIR in question, in view of the above statement of the petitioner. Accordingly, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding further with the FIR in question and the proceedings emanating therefrom. The same are quashed subject to compliance of the aforesaid condition. Dasti.

VIPIN SANGHI, J MARCH 30, 2017 B.S. Rohella