SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Nitin vs State Of Haryana on 26 July, 2017


Criminal Misc. M- No. 23886 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : July 26, 2017

Nitin …..Petitioner


State of Haryana and another ….Respondents


Present: Mr. N.C. Kinra, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana.

Ms. Vandana, Advocate for respondent No. 2.



The petitioner prays for concession of anticipatory bail in FIR

No. 210 dated 17.05.2017 registered under Sections 498A, 406, 506, 323/34

at Police Station Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Nagar, Faridabad.

It is submitted that the matter has been amicably resolved

between the petitioner and the complainant – respondent No. 2 yesterday

itself i.e. 25.07.2017.

Settlement dated 25.07.2017 detailing the terms and conditions

thereof filed in Court today, is taken on record subject to just exceptions. It

is submitted that in terms of the said settlement, a sum of `9 lakhs by way of

demand draft has been handed over to respondent No. 2. A petition under

Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short – ‘the Act’) shall be

filed by the parties. The remaining amount of `2 lakhs shall be handed over

1 of 2
30-07-2017 17:20:02 :::
Criminal Misc. M- No. 23886 of 2017 (OM) -2-

by the petitioner to respondent No. 2 at the time of recording of statements

of the parties at second motion in the petition under Section 13B of the Act.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 affirms and verifies the

factum of settlement between the parties. It is submitted that in view of the

said settlement, respondent No. 2 has no objection if this petition is allowed

subject to strict adherence to the terms and conditions of the agreement by

the petitioner.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances noted above

especially the settlement arrived at between the parties, it is considered just

and expedient to allow this petition.

In the event of his arrest, petitioner be released on bail to the

satisfaction of Investigating Officer. He shall join investigation as may be

required. Petitioner shall comply with the conditions stipulated in Section

438(2) Cr.P.C.

Liberty is afforded to respondent No. 2 to move an appropriate

application in case the terms and conditions of the settlement are not

adhered to by the petitioner.

(Lisa Gill)
July 26, 2017 Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

2 of 2
30-07-2017 17:20:03 :::

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 © 2024 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