Rajnish Verma & ORS v. State & ANR

$~51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2650/2016 RAJNISH VERMA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. with Mr.

Chandra Shekhar, Adv.

versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, ASC for State with SI Sunny Kumar, P.S. Rani Bagh.

Mr. Vikas K. Bharti, Adv. for R-2 along with R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 09.09.2016 Petitioner no. 1 and respondent no.2 were married on 3rd June, 2015. They could live together only for about two months. On the complaint of respondent no.2, present FIR under Sections 498A-/377/313/506/34 IPC was registered at police station Rani Bagh against the petitioner no.1 and his relatives, that is, petitioner nos. 2 to 4.

Learned ASC for the State submits that investigations are still pending.

Petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 have settled their disputes amicably on the terms and conditions as stipulated in the Memorandum of Undertaking/Settlement dated 19th July, 2016 (Annexure P-1). Petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 have decided to part their ways. Petitioner no.1

has agreed to pay `15 lacs to the respondent no.2 towards for full and final settlement all her claims.

It is submitted that first motion under Section 13-B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, the 'Act') has already been accepted by the Family Court, Rohini Court on 24th August, 2016. Respondent no. 2 is present in Court and has been identified by the Investigating Officer.

Respondent no.2 admits that she has settled the matter with the petitioners. She further admits that she has already received `12 lacs. In terms of the settlement, remaining settled amount, that is, `3 lacs has been given to the respondent no.2 today in Court by the petitioner no.1 by way of demand draft photocopy whereof has been placed on record. Respondent no. 2 submits that FIR be quashed in view of the settlement arrived at between her and the petitioners.

Parties shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement. Keeping in mind that FIR emanates from the disputes between the husband (petitioner no.1) and wife (respondent no.2) which they have settled, inasmuch as, decided to part ways to start their live afresh, no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping them entangled in present criminal proceedings. Accordingly, FIR No.636/2015 under Sections 498-A/377/313/506/34 IPC registered at police station Rani Bagh is quashed subject to, however,

petitioner cooperating in second motion petition to be filed under Section 13-B (2) of the Act in due course.

Writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. A.K. PATHAK, J.

SEPTEMBER 09, 2016 ga