Sh. Rohit Sharma & ORS. v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.
$~45 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 4720/2018 and Crl. M.A. no. 32234/2018 SH. ROHIT SHARMA & ORS.
..... Petitioners Through Mr.
Joginder Sukhija, Adv.
with petitioners in person versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
..... Respondents Through Mr. Izhar Ahmad, APP with ASI Hawa Singh, P.S. Nihal Vihar Mr.
Prakash Gautam, Adv.
with respondent no. 2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
O R D E R
% 17.09.2018 Notice.
Learned APP accepts notice for respondent no. 1.
Respondent no.2-Ms. Maneesha Sharma is present in Court along with her counsel and accepts notice. She has been identified by ASI Hawa Singh of police station Nihal Vihar.
Learned APP submits that Suhavani, Monika and Ashutosh are also accused but they have not been impleaded in this petition. Learned counsels for the petitioners and respondent no. 2 submit that these accused have already been discharged by the trial court vide order dated 6th July, 2013. Respondent no.2 submits that she has settled the matter with the petitioners no. 1 of her own free will and without any undue force, pressure
or coercion before the Family Courts, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi on 5th June, 2018. Respondent no. 2 further submits that her marriage with petitioner no.1 has already been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent dated 16th July, 2018 passed by the Family Courts, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Petitioner no. 1 has paid `10,00,000/- to the respondent no. 2, vide a demand draft, photocopy whereof has been placed on record. Respondent no. 2 says that entire settled amount stands paid with this payment and she has no objection in case FIR no. 56/2009 under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Nihal Vihar and consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed against the petitioner no. 1 and his relatives, that is, petitioner nos. 2 and 3.
Keeping in mind the settlement arrived at between the petitioners and respondent no. 2 voluntarily, in my view, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep the criminal proceedings pending. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous application is disposed of as infructuous. Dasti.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
SEPTEMBER 17, 2018/r.bararia