$~52
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 05.09.2018
+ W.P.(CRL) 2631/2018
AMIT MALIK ORS. ….. Petitioners
versus
THE STATE ANR. ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Roshan Lal Saini and Ms. Kavita Saini,
Advocates.
For the Respondent : Ms. Iti Pandey, Advocate for Ms. Nandita Rao,
Advocate for State with W/ASI Sunita
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
05.09.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl. M.A. 31347-48 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(CRL) 2631/2018
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners prays for exemption from
personal appearance on behalf of petitioner no. 2 3. Learned counsel
submits that petitioner no. 2 and 3 are father and mother of petitioner no.
W.P.(CRL) 2631/2018 Page 1 of 3
1 and on account of their health condition, they could not be present
personally in Court. Their affidavits in support of the petition have been
filed. In view of the above, petitioner no. 2 and 3 are granted exemption
from personal appearance.
2. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 142 of 2016 under
Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Crime (Women)
Cell, Nanakpura, New Delhi.
3. The subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord. Petitioner
No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2. Petitioner No.2 and 3 are the
father-in-law and mother-in-law of the respondent No.2, respectively.
Petitioners No.4 to 6 are the other family members of petitioner no. 1.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have
settled their disputes before the Counselling Cell, Family Court, Saket
on 15.09.2016. 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. 4,50,000/-
in full and final settlement of all her claims. A sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- has
already been paid and the balance sum of Rs.2,00,000/- has been paid to
the respondent No.2 by way of Demand Draft No.000976 dated
13.07.2018 drawn on ICICI Bank, today in Court.
6. The respondent No.2 is present in person and is identified by the
Investigating Officer. She submits that she has settled her disputes with
W.P.(CRL) 2631/2018 Page 2 of 3
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 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 therefrom.
8. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 142 of 2016
under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at Police Station Crime
(Women) Cell, Nanakpura, New Delhi and the consequent proceedings
emanating there from are quashed.
9. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.
10. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
SEPTEMBER 05, 2018
‘rs’
W.P.(CRL) 2631/2018 Page 3 of 3
