SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Amit Tanwar & Ors vs The State Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 5 September, 2017


+ W.P.(CRL) 2426/2017
AMIT TANWAR ORS ….. Petitioners
Through Mr. Pankaj Tanwar, Advocate with
Mr.D.S. Tomar, Advocate and petitioners in


Through: Ms. Kamna Vohra, ASC, for the State
with SI Ravi Yadav, P.S. Kotla Mubarakpur, New
Mr. Munish Chhoker, Advocate for R-2 along with
respondent No.2 in person.



% 05.09.2017

1. Respondent no. 2 is present. She is being represented by her counsel.

She is duly identified by IO Ravi Yadav.

2. 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
the FIR bearing No.420 registered on 14.04.2015 against them with
Police Station Kotla Mubarakpur, South Delhi, under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC on the complaint of respondent No.2.

3. The marriage of the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no. 2 was

W.P. (Crl.) No.2426/2017 Page 1 of 4
solemnized on 20.02.2011 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies.
However, out of this wedlock no child was born.

4. 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
20.05.2011 and started residing separately.

5. The respondent no. 2 lodged a complaint with CAW Cell which
culminated into said FIR against the petitioners. She had also filed a
petition under Section 12 of The Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘DV Act’).

6. On making reference by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on the
application of the petitioner No.1 for grant of anticipatory bail, the
parties appeared before the learned Mediator, Delhi Mediation Centre,
Saket Court, New Delhi. They had resolved and settled their all
disputes on 20.10.2015. 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.25,00,000/- to the respondent no.2
in full and final settlement of her all claims including the maintenance
and cost of dowry/stridhan articles.

7. Pursuant to this settlement, at the time of recording the statement of
the parties in the first motion petition, a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- was
paid by the petitioner no. 1 to the respondent no. 2. Further, a sum of
Rs.5,00,000/- was paid by the petitioner No.1 to the respondent No.2

W.P. (Crl.) No.2426/2017 Page 2 of 4
at the time of recording of their statement in the second motion
petition. A decree of divorce by mutual consent was awarded on
01.09.2016 by the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Courts,
South East District, Saket, New Delhi by which the marriage between
the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no.2 was dissolved.

8. The respondent No.2 present in the court states that pursuant to the
settlement she had withdrawn her both the petitions under Section 12
of the D.V. Act.

9. Today, the petitioner No.1 has paid the balance settlement amount of
Rs.10,00,000/- vide two separate DD No. i) 000162 and ii) DD
No.000163, both dated 21.07.2017 for Rs.5 lacs each, issued by
Panjab National Bank, Delhi to respondent No.2. The respondent
No.2 present in the court states that she had voluntarily settled and
resolved all disputes with the petitioners without any force and
coercion. She further submits that she has received the entire
settlement amount from the petitioner No.1. She submits that she does
not want to pursue the present FIR. She submits that the said FIR
may be quashed.

10. Learned ASC through IO submits that the charge sheet has so far not
been filed.

11. Both the parties submit that now nothing is due and recoverable by
them against each other. The matter had been amicably settled
between the parties and no purpose would be served in further
pursuing the said FIR. Hence, to secure ends of justice, the FIR
bearing No.420 registered on 14.04.2015 against the petitioners with
Police Station Kotla Mubarakpur, South Delhi, under Sections

W.P. (Crl.) No.2426/2017 Page 3 of 4
498A/406/34 IPC and proceedings arising out of the said FIR are
hereby quashed.

12. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

13. DASTI.


SEPTEMBER 05, 2017

W.P. (Crl.) No.2426/2017 Page 4 of 4

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
MyNation Times Magzine

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


Copyright © 2021 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