$~26 27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 27.07.2018
+ CRL.M.C. 2609/2018
BHUPENDER ORS ….. Petitioners
versus
STATE ANR ….. Respondents
+ CRL.M.C. 2622/2018
BRIJ MOHAN ORS ….. Petitioners
versus
STATE ANR ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Ms. Padma Priya with Mr. Anchit Bhandari,
Advocates with petitioners in person.
For the Respondent: Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for State in CRL.M.C.
2609/2018
Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State in CRL.M.C.
2622/2018
SI Anurag Tyagi, PS Sarai Rohilla
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
27.07.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioners in Crl.M.C.2609/2018 seek quashing of FIR
CRL.M.C. 2609/2018 Page 1 of 3
CRL.M.C. 2622/2018
No.282/2013, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Police Station Sarai
Rohilla and the petitioners in Crl.M.C.2622/2018 seek quashing of
FIR No.30/2013 under Sections 323/341/354/506/34 IPC, PS Sarojini
Nagar.
2. The subject FIR emanates out of a matrimonial discord.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have
settled their disputes before the Counselling Cell, Dwarka Court on
15.07.2017. The parties have already been divorced by way of a
decree of divorce by mutual consent, passed on 13.03.2018.
4. Respondent No.2 was to be paid a total sum of Rs. 15,00,000/-,
in full and final settlement of all her claims. A sum of Rs. 10,00,000/-
has already been paid. The balance sum of Rs.5,00,000/- has been
paid to respondent No.2 by way of demand draft No.689267dated
17.07.2018 drawn on State Bank of India.
5. As per the settlement, the permanent custody of the minor child
born out of the wedlock is to remain with the respondent No.2. The
petitioners, who are present in Court in person, undertake that they
shall not claim any rights contrary to the settlement agreement
between the parties. The undertaking is accepted.
6. Respondent No.2 is present in person, represented by counsel
and is identified by the Investigating Officer. She submits that she
CRL.M.C. 2609/2018 Page 2 of 3
CRL.M.C. 2622/2018
has settled her disputes with the petitioners and does not wish to press
charges against the petitioners and prosecute the complaint any
further.
7. In view of the fact that the proceedings emanate out of a
matrimonial discord and the parties have fully and finally settled their
disputes and the respondent No.2 has stated that she does not wish to
press the complaint any further and the fact that the parties have
already been divorced by way of a decree of divorce by mutual
consent, passed on 13.03.2018, continuation of criminal proceedings
will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the
dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored;
securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. It would
be expedient to quash the subject FIR and the consequent proceedings
emanating there from.
8. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.282/2013,
under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Police Station Sarai Rohilla and
FIR No.30/2013 under Sections 323/341/354/506/34 IPC, PS Sarojini
Nagar and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are
quashed.
9. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
JULY 27, 2018/st SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
CRL.M.C. 2609/2018 Page 3 of 3
CRL.M.C. 2622/2018