High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/3178/2016

Smt Kamla Devi v. State (Govt Of NCT Of Delhi) & ANR

2016-11-04Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vipin Sanghi2 pages

$~40.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3178/2016 SMT KAMLA DEVI ..... Petitioner Through:

Ms. Anima Kujur, Advocate.

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

Mr. Mehul Jain, Advocate for Ms.

Nandita Rao, ASC along with SI Rajkumar, CAW Cell/E, for the State.

Mr. Ajay Chaudhary, Ms. Reema Bhola & Mr.

Parambir Singh, Advocates for and along with respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

O R D E R

% 04.11.2016 Crl.M.A. No.17143/2016 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 3178/2016 Issue notice. Respondent No.2 accepts notice. She is represented through counsel. As proof of her identity, she has produced her Aadhaar Card. A copy thereof has been retained on record.

The petitioner is the erstwhile mother-in-law of respondent No.2. She has preferred the petition to seek quashing of the FIR in question, i.e. FIR No.85/2013 under Section 498A/ 406 IPC at PS - Mayur Vihar, District East Delhi. The other accused, including the husband of the complainant have not preferred the petition to seek quashing of the FIR. Respondent No.2, however, states that she does not wish to pursue her complaint against any of the accused.

In terms of the settlement, the respondent No.2 has already obtained divorce by mutual consent from her erstwhile husband Sunil Kumar Sood. The settlement recorded before the mediation centre is also on record. In terms of the said settlement, a sum of Rs.50,000/- has been tendered to the respondent No.2 by the petitioner and she has accepted the same in full & final settlement of her claims. She has already received Rs.2 Lakhs earlier. The complaint states that she joins the prayer for quashing of the FIR not only against the petitioner but also against the other accused as well. Accordingly, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding further with the FIR in question and the proceedings emanating therefrom. The same are hereby quashed.

VIPIN SANGHI, J NOVEMBER 04, 2016 B.S. Rohella