* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 20.08.2018
+ CRL.M.C. 3124/2018
SHUBHASHISH GANGULY ANR ….. Petitioners
THE STATE ANR ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Ms.Namita Roy and Mr. Abhijit Acharaya, Advs.
For the Respondent: Mr. Kamal Kr. Ghai, Addl. PP for the State with SI
Mr. Sandeep Kaushik and Mr. Muskan Sharma,
Advocates for R-2
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 377 of 2014 under
Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC registered at Police Vikas Puri, New
Delhi, based on a settlement. It is contended that the FIR was lodged
consequent to a matrimonial discord.
2. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have
settled their disputes by way of a settlement before the Lok Adalat
dated 11.02.2017. As per the settlement, a total sum of Rs. 15 lakhs
CRL.M.C. 3124/2018 Page 1 of 3
has been agreed to be paid to respondent no. 2. A sum of Rs. 10 lakhs
has already been paid to respondent no. 2 and the balance sum of Rs.
5 lakhs in the form of Fixed Deposit Receipt has been deposited in the
name of minor son of the petitioner. Original FDR has been handed
over to respondent no. 2. The parties have already been divorced by
way of a decree of divorce by mutual consent passed on 12.04.2018.
3. It is pointed by learned counsel for respondent No. 2 that there
is a slight error in the name of the respondent no. 2 who is nominee in
the FDR. Learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions,
submits that PAN number of respondent no. 2 has been given to the
bank and in case there is a problem in encashment or renewal of the
FDR, he undertakes to execute such documents as may be required by
the bank. The undertaking is accepted.
4. It is further agreed between the parties that the custody of the
minor child shall remain with respondent no. 2. The petitioner who is
present in court in person undertakes that he shall not claim any right
contrary to the settlement terms. The undertaking is accepted.
5. Respondent no. 2 who is present in court in person, represented
by her counsel and is identified by the Investigating Officer submits
that she has settled the disputes with the petitioners and is agreeable to
the settlement and does not wish to press the criminal charges against
the petitioners any further.
CRL.M.C. 3124/2018 Page 2 of 3
6. 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
7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 377 of
2014 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC registered at Police
Vikas Puri, New Delhi and the consequent proceedings therefrom are,
8. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
AUGUST 20, 2018
CRL.M.C. 3124/2018 Page 3 of 3