SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sakal Sharma & Ors. vs The State ( Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) & … on 20 July, 2018

$~71
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 20.07.2018

+ CRL.M.C. 3585/2018
SAKAL SHARMA ORS ….. Petitioners

versus

THE STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ANR….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr.Rishabh Jain with Mr. Alok Kumar Singh,
Advs. along with petitioners in person

For the Respondent: Mr. P.L. Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI
Azad Singh, P.S. Ranhola
Mr. Vineet Mittal, Adv. for R-2 along with
respondent No.2 in person

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

JUDGMENT

20.07.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl. M.A. 28167/2018(Exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 3585/2018

1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.692 of 2014 under
Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC at Police Station Ranhola, New
Delhi, based on a settlement.

CRL.M.C. 3585/2018 Page 1 of 3

2. Subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord. Petitioner
No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2. is the father-in-law of the
respondent No.2. Petitioner No.3 is the mother-in-law of the
respondent No.2. Petitioner Nos.4, 5 and 6 are the sisters-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 01.10.2014. Two
children have also been born out of the wedlock.

4. Respondent No.2 further submits that she has settled all her
disputes with her husband and his family and does not wish to
prosecute the complaint either against her husband or against her
father-in-law, mother-in-law and sisters-in-law who are petitioner
Nos.3 to 6. She submits that in view of the fact that she has settled
with her husband and wants to restore the family ties, she submits that
the FIR be quashed against the petitioners.

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. 3585/2018 Page 2 of 3
there from.

6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 692 of
2014 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, Police Station: Ranhola,
New Delhi and the consequent proceedings there from are,
accordingly quashed.

7. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JULY 20, 2018
ns

CRL.M.C. 3585/2018 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