SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Krishan Kant vs State Of Delhi & Ors. on 30 August, 2018

$~67
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment delivered on: 30.08.2018

+ CRL.M.C. 4399/2018
KRISHAN KANT ….. Petitioner

versus

STATE OF DELHI ORS ….. Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr.Pushpender Shukla, Adv.

For the Respondent: Ms.Neelam Sharma, Addl. PP for
the State with ASI Gyan Singh, P.S.Pul Prahladpur.

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

JUDGMENT

30.08.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 388 of 2011 under
Sections 498A/406 of the IPC registered at Police Station Pul
Prahladpur, Delhi based on a settlement. It is contended that the FIR
was lodged consequent to a matrimonial discord.

2. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the parties have
entered into a settlement vide Compromise Deed dated 09.04.2018.

CRL.M.C. 4399/2018 Page 1 of 3

3. As per the settlement, a total sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- has been
agreed to be paid to respondent no. 2. A sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- has
already been paid and the balance sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- has been
paid, today in Court, by way DD No. 511620 dated 31.07.2018 issued
by ICICI Bank to respondent No. 2, who is present in Court in person.

4. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have
settled their disputes and the parties submit that they shall be duly
applying for grant of divorce by mutual consent within a statutory
period.

5. As per the settlement the minor child shall remain in the
permanent custody of respondent No.2. The petitioner who is present
in Court undertakes that he shall not claim any rights contrary to the
settlement terms. He further undertakes that at the time of recording of
the statement on second motion, he shall duly pay the balance amount
of Rs.2,00,000/- to respondent No.2. The undertakings are accepted.

6. Respondent no. 2 is present in court in person, represented by
counsel and is identified by the IO. Respondent no. 2 submits that she
has settled the dispute with the petitioners and is agreeable to the
settlement and does not wish to press the criminal charges against the
petitioners any further.

7. In view of the fact that the disputes between the petitioner and
respondent no. 2 emanate out of a matrimonial discord and have been

CRL.M.C. 4399/2018 Page 2 of 3
settled, 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. 388 of
2011 under Sections 498A/406 of the IPC registered at Police Station
Pul Prahladpur, Delhi, and the consequent proceedings emanating
there from are, accordingly quashed.

9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
AUGUST 30, 2018
rk

CRL.M.C. 4399/2018 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