SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dharamjeet Singh & Ors. vs The State ( Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. on 23 July, 2018

$~76
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 23.07.2018

+ CRL.M.C. 3616/2018
DHARAMJEET SINGH ORS ….. Petitioners

versus

THE STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) ANR ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr.Pranay Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Addl. PP for the State with
ASI Hawa Singh, P.S. Nihal Vihar
Mr. S.N. Thakur, Adv. for R-2

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

JUDGMENT

23.07.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl. M.A. 28291/2018(Exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 3616/2018

1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.1094 of 2015 under
Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC at Police Station Nihal Vihar, New
Delhi, based on a settlement. It is contended that the FIR was lodged
consequent to a matrimonial discord.

CRL.M.C. 3616/2018 Page 1 of 3

2. The subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord.
Petitioner No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2. petitioner No.2 is
the mother-in-law of the respondent No.2. Petitioner No.3 is the
brother-in-law of the respondent No.2.

3. Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 who appears in person
submit that they have settled their disputes and they have started
living together amicably as husband and wife since 25.04.2018. One
child has also been born out of the wedlock. Respondent No.2 further
submits that she has settled all her disputes with her husband and does
not wish to prosecute the complaint either against her husband or
against her mother-in-law and brother-in-law who are petitioner Nos.2
and 3 respectively. She submits that in view of the fact that she has
settled with her husband and wants to restore the family ties and wants
that the FIR be quashed.

4. The respondent No.2 is present in person, represented by
counsel and is identified by the Investigating Officer.

5. In view of the fact that the disputes between the petitioner No.1
and respondent No.2 have been settled and they have started living
together, 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

CRL.M.C. 3616/2018 Page 2 of 3
there from.

6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.1094 of
2015 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC at Police Station Nihal
Vihar, New Delhi and the consequent proceedings emanating
therefrom are, accordingly quashed.

7. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JULY 23, 2018
ns

CRL.M.C. 3616/2018 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 © 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