$~32
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: January 07, 2020
+ W.P.(CRL) 22/2020 and CRL.M.A. 96/2020
SH. SUBHASH SHARDA ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through: Mr. M.S. Bammi and Mr. Nitesh
Kumar, Advocates alongwith
petitioners in person (except
petitioner no.2)
Versus
STATE ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Avi Singh, ASC with Mr.
Divyanshu Sharma, Advocate for
the State with ASI Rajesh Kumar,
P.S.: Jagat Puri
Ms. Arti Thakur, Advocate for
Respondent no.2/Complainant
alongwith Respondent no.2/
complainant in person
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI
JUDGMENT
BRIJESH SETHI, J (oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.2 is
not present today as she is unwell.
Heard. Petitioner no.2 is exempted from her personal appearance.
W.P.(Crl.) 22/2020 Page 1 of 3
Learned counsels for the parties submit that Clause (j) of the
Settlement Agreement dated 18.03.2019 may be deleted.
Heard. Allowed. Clause (j) of the Settlement Agreement dated
18.03.2019 stands deleted.
The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.
0134/2017, under sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(‘IPC’), registered at P.S.: Jagat Puri and the proceedings emanating
therefrom.
The petitioners and respondent no.2 have submitted that they have
settled their disputes before the Delhi High Court Mediation and
Conciliation Centre, Delhi High Court, New Delhi on 18.03.2019. The
parties have already obtained divorce by mutual consent on 03.12.2019.
The settlement amount was Rs. 8,00,000/-, out of which Rs. 3,00,000/-
has been paid to respondent no.2 at the time of first motion and Rs.
2,50,000/- has further been paid to respondent no.2 at the time of second
motion and a demand draft of Rs. 2,50,000/- has been handed over to
respondent no.2 today in the court. Copy of the said demand draft has
been placed on record.
Respondent no.2, who is present in Court, has reiterated the
aforesaid facts and submitted that they have amicably settled their
dispute. Respondent no.2 further submitted that she has no objection to
the FIR being quashed and the petition being allowed.
W.P.(Crl.) 22/2020 Page 2 of 3
The Investigating Officer, who is present in Court, has identified
the petitioners as well as respondent no.2.
In view of the above settlement arrived at between the parties, this
Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping
the parties entangled in the criminal proceedings. Accordingly, in the
interest of justice, FIR No. 0134/2017, under sections 498A/406/34 of the
IPC, registered at P.S.: Jagat Puri and the proceedings emanating
therefrom are quashed.
Petition alongwith pending application is disposed of accordingly.
(BRIJESH SETHI)
JUDGE
JANUARY 07, 2020
savita
W.P.(Crl.) 22/2020 Page 3 of 3
