Om Prakash & Ors. vs State & Anr on 7 September, 2017

$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2240/2017

OM PRAKASH ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through Mr. K.R. Kaushik Advocate with
Mr.Shokeen Rajput, Advocate along with
petitioners in person.

versus

STATE ANR ….. Respondents
Through Ms. Srilina Roy, Advocate for
Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for the State with SI
Davender Kumar, P.S. Dabri
Mr. M.K. Yadav, Advocate for R-2 along with
respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL

ORDER

% 08.09.2017

1. Notice. On behalf of learned ASC Ms. Nandita Rao, learned
appearing counsel for the State, accepts notice.

2. Notice to respondent no. 2 also. She is present in court and accepts
notice. She is being represented by her counsel. She is duly identified
by IO ASI Devender Kumar.

3. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ‘
Cr.PC’) for quashing of

W.P. (Crl.) No.2240/2017 Page 1 of 4
the FIR bearing No.103/2013, registered on 21.02.2013 against them
with Police Station Dabri, District South West, Delhi, under
Sections
498A/
406/34 IPC on the complaint of respondent No.2.

4. The marriage of the petitioner no.1 with the respondent no. 2 was
solemnized on 28.05.2010 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies in Delhi.
However, out of this wedlock no child was born.

5. After solemnization of their marriage, the petitioner no. 1 and the
respondent no. 2 started residing together in the matrimonial home.
Due to some temperamental differences between the petitioner no. 1
and the respondent no. 2, they could not reconcile with each other.
Resultantly, the respondent no.2 left the matrimonial home on
20.07.2012 and started residing separately.

6. The respondent no. 2 lodged a complaint with CAW Cell which
culminated into said FIR against the petitioners.

7. The petitioner No.1 filed a divorce petition under Section 1 (1) (ia)
bearing No.612/2012 before the learned Principal Judge, Family
Courts, Dwarka, New Delhi.

8. On making reference by the learned Principal Judge, Family Courts,
Dwarka, New Delhi, the parties have settled all their disputes before
the learned Principal Counsellor attached to the court of Family
Courts, New Delhi on 08.01.2015. By this settlement, the petitioner
no. 1 and the respondent no. 2 had decided to part company of each
other and obtain a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The
petitioner no. 1 had agreed to pay a total sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the
respondent no. 2 in full and final settlement of her all claims including
the maintenance and cost of dowry/stridhan articles.

W.P. (Crl.) No.2240/2017 Page 2 of 4

9. Pursuant to this settlement, at the time of recording the statement of
the parties in the first motion petition, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was
paid by the petitioner no. 1 to the respondent no. 2. Further, a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- was paid by the petitioner No.1 to the respondent No.2
at the time of recording their statement in the second motion petition.
A decree of divorce by mutual consent was awarded on 05.12.2015 by
the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Courts, West District,
Dwarka Courts, Delhi by which the marriage between the petitioner
no. 1 and the respondent no.2 was dissolved. The respondent No.2
submits that she had voluntarily settled all her dispute with the
petitioner without any force or coercion. She further submits that she
had received all dowry articles from the petitioners.

10. Today, the petitioner No.1 has paid the balance settlement amount of
Rs.1,00,000/- vide DD No.676837 dated 23.05.2017 issued by
Allahabad Bank, Bindapur, New Delhi Branch in favour of
respondent No.2, which has been accepted by her. The respondent
No.2 submits that she has received the entire settlement amount from
the petitioner No.1. She submits that she does not want to pursue the
said FIR. She submits that the said FIR may be quashed.

11. Learned ASC through IO submits that the charge sheet has already
been filed against the petitioners.

12. Both the parties submit that now nothing is due and recoverable by
them against each other. Since the parties have amicably settled their
all disputes, no fruitful purpose would be served in further pursuing
with the said FIR. Hence, to secure ends of justice, the FIR bearing
No.103/2013, registered on 21.02.2013 with Police Station Dabri,

W.P. (Crl.) No.2240/2017 Page 3 of 4
District South West, Delhi, under
Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and
proceedings arising out of the said FIR are hereby quashed.

13. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

14. DASTI.

VINOD GOEL, J.

SEPTEMBER 08, 2017
“sandeep”

W.P. (Crl.) No.2240/2017 Page 4 of 4

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *