SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mohd. Tasleem Siddiqui & Anr. vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 2 July, 2019

$~14

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 02.07.2019
+ CRL.M.C. 1383/2019
MOHD. TASLEEM SIDDIQUI ANR ….. Petitioners
versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ANR ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Verma with Mr. Mohd. Riyaz Ahmad
Ali, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for the State with ASI
Rohtash, PS Aman Vihar.
Ms. Manju Rani, Advocate for respondent No.2
with respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.382/2016, under Sections
498A/Section406/Section34 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police
Station Anand Vihar, Outer District, based on a settlement.

2. Subject FIR emanates out of a matrimonial discord.

3. Petitioner No.1 is the husband of the respondent No.2 –
complainant. Petitioner No.2 is the mother-in-law of the respondent
No.2. Father of the petitioner has expired after the registration of the
FIR.

CRL.M.C. 1383/2019 Page 1 of 3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that parties have
resolved their disputes and MOU dated 04.09.2018 has been executed
between the parties.

5. As per the settlement, petitioner has agreed to pay a total sum
of Rs.70,000/- in full and final settlement of all claims of the
respondent No.2. A sum of Rs.30,000/- has already been paid. The
balance sum of Rs.40,000/- has been paid today in Court in cash to the
respondent No.2, who is present in Court in person.

6. Parties have already divorced in accordance with Muslim Law
on 04.09.2018.

7. Respondent No.2 is present in person, represented by counsel
and is identified by the Investigating Officer. She submits that she has
amicably resolved the disputes with her husband and his family
members. She submits that she does not wish to press charges against
the petitioners and has no objection to the quashing of the subject FIR.

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

CRL.M.C. 1383/2019 Page 2 of 3

9. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.382/2016,
under Sections 498A/Section406/Section34 IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition
Act, Police Station Anand Vihar, Outer District and the consequent
proceedings emanating there from are quashed.

10. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

JULY 02, 2019 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
st

CRL.M.C. 1383/2019 Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

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

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