SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Tarun Kapoor & Ors. vs The State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & … on 3 January, 2018

$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment delivered on: 03.01.2018

+ CRL.M.C. 1/2018

TARUN KAPOOR ORS ….. Petitioners

versus

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ANR
….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner : Mr. S.G. Asthana and Mr. Jaswant
M., Advocates with petitioners in
person.

For the Respondents : Mr. Arun Kumar Sharma, APP for
State.
SI Anju Tyagi, PS Hari Nagar in FIR
No.900/2015.
ASI Subhash, PS Prashant Vihar.
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

JUDGMENT

03.01.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioners seek quashing of the FIR No.900/2015 under
Section 498A/406/34 IPC, P.S. Hari Nagar and the consequent
proceedings arising therefrom, pending in the Court of Metropolitan
Magistrate in Cr. Case No.1125/2017.

CRL.M.C. 1/2018 Page 1 of 3

2. The petitioner No.1 is the husband of the respondent No.2, the
complainant. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of the
petitioner No.1 and the petitioner No.4 is the brother of the petitioner
No.1.

3. A settlement has been arrived at between the parties, as
recorded on 24.01.2017 in matrimonial case being MT No.134/2015,
wherein, the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.2 had agreed to
dissolve their marriage by mutual consent. It is stated that both the
first as well as the second motion have already been recorded and the
final order dissolving the marriage between the parties has been
passed on 14.09.2017. In terms of the settlement, the petitioner No.1
had agreed to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the respondent No.2
towards all her claims. A sum of Rs.7,00,000/- has already been paid
to the petitioner. The balance sum of Rs.3,00,000/- is being paid to
the respondent No.2 by way of a Demand Draft No.224097 dated
29.12.2017 drawn on the State Bank of India, Hussainpur, Kapurthala.
The said amount is accepted by the respondent No.2, who is present in
Court and is identified by the IO.

4. The respondent No.2 submits that she has no objection to the
quashing of the FIR and the consequent proceedings and submits that
she has amicably settled all her disputes with the petitioners.

5. The disputes inter se the petitioner and respondent No. 2 are
personal and not of a serious nature. In view of the settlement arrived

CRL.M.C. 1/2018 Page 2 of 3
at between the parties and, because the disputes arise out of a
matrimonial discord and an amicable settlement has taken place and
further that the marriage between the parties has been dissolved by
way of mutual consent, I am of the view that no purpose would be
served in continuing with the proceedings and ends of justice require
that the proceedings be quashed.

6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. The FIR
No.900/2015 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC, P.S. Hari Nagar and
the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are, accordingly,
quashed.

7. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JANUARY 03, 2018
st

CRL.M.C. 1/2018 Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Group Rules, If You agree then JOIN HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh