$~58
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 29.08.2018
+ CRL.M.C. 4372/2018
SH. CHUNNI MANOJ KUMAR ORS. ….. Petitioners
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ANR. ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Ms. Ritu Goyal, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the
State.
ASI Jai Kishan, PS Mangol Puri.
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
29.08.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl.M.A.30911/2018 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 4378/2018
1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.94/2016 under
Sections 498A/406/34 IPC read with Section 4 Dowry Prohibition
Act, Police Station Mangolpuri.
2. The subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord.
CRL.M.C. 4372/2018 Page 1 of 3
Petitioner No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2. Petitioner Nos.2
and 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the respondent No.2.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have
settled their disputes and a Settlement Deed dated 26.06.2018 has
been executed between the parties. The parties have already been
divorced by way of decree of divorce, passed on 09.05.2017.
4. The respondent No.2 was to be paid a total sum of
Rs.2,00,000/- in full and final settlement of all her claims. A sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- has already been paid. The balance sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- has been paid to the respondent No.2 today in Court in
cash.
5. As per the settlement, the three minor children shall remain in
the permanent custody of their father/petitioner. The respondent No.2
who is present in Court, undertakes that she shall not claim any rights
contrary to the settlement terms. The undertaking is accepted.
6. The respondent No.2 is present in person and is identified by
the Investigating Officer. She acknowledges the receipt of the entire
sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. She further submits that she has settled her
disputes with the petitioners and does not wish to press charges
against the petitioners and prosecute the complaint any further.
7. In view of the fact that the proceedings emanate out of a
matrimonial discord and the parties have fully and finally settled their
CRL.M.C. 4372/2018 Page 2 of 3
disputes and the respondent No.2 has stated that she does not wish to
press the complaint any further and the fact that the parties have
already been divorced by way of a decree of divorce, passed on
09.05.2017, 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
therefrom.
8. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.94/2016
under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC read with Section 4 Dowry
Prohibition Act, Police Station Mangolpuri and the consequent
proceedings emanating there from are quashed.
9. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
AUGUST 29, 2018
st
CRL.M.C. 4372/2018 Page 3 of 3
