SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Abhishek Chadha & Ors. vs State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. on 25 July, 2018

$~50
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 25.07.2018

+ CRL.M.C. 3650/2018
ABHISHEK CHADHA ORS. ….. Petitioners

versus

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ANR. ….. Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr. J.P. Sharma with Mr. D.K.
Sharma, Advocates.

For the Respondent: Mr. Kamal Kumar Gahi, APP for the
State.
SI Usha, PS Bindapur.
Mr. D.P. Verma, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

JUDGMENT

25.07.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl. M.A. 28458/2018(Exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 3650/2018

1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.106/2017 under
Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Police Station Bindapur, South.

CRL.M.C. 3650/2018 Page 1 of 3

2. The subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord.

3. Petitioner No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2. Petitioner
Nos.2 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the respondent
No.2. Petitioner No.4 is the sister-in-law of the respondent No.2.
Petitioner No.5 is the husband of the petitioner No.4.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the disputes
between the parties have been settled and a settlement agreement
dated 12.09.2017 has been executed between the parties. The parties
have already been divorced by way of a decree of divorce by mutual
consent, passed on 23.03.2018.

5. The respondent No.2 was to be paid a total sum of
Rs.4,30,000/-. A sum of Rs.3,00,000/- has already been paid. The
balance sum of Rs.1,30,000/- has been paid to the respondent No.2 by
way of Demand Draft No.327692 dated 23.07.2018 drawn on
Syndicate Bank.

6. The respondent No.2 is present in person, represented by
counsel and is identified by the Investigating Officer. She submits that
she 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

CRL.M.C. 3650/2018 Page 2 of 3
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 23.03.2018, 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.106/2017
under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Police Station: Bindapur, South and
the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are, accordingly
quashed.

9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JULY 25, 2018
st

CRL.M.C. 3650/2018 Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2020 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 read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation