SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sunil Kumar & Ors. vs State & Anr. on 3 October, 2018

$~64
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment delivered on:03.10.2018

+ CRL.M.C. 5049/2018
SUNIL KUMAR ORS. ….. Petitioners
versus

STATE ANR. ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhairav Dass Mr. Mr. Yogesh Dass,
Advocates.

For the Respondents : Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Addl. PP for the State
SI Vijay Kumar, PS Farsh Bazar.
Mr. Krishan Kumar Mr. Vipin Chander,
Advocates for R-2.
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT

03.10.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

Crl. M.A. No.33437/2018 (for exemption)

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Crl. M.C. No.5049/2018 Crl. M.A. No.33436/2018 (for stay)

1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.269/2010 under
Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act,

CRL.M.C. 5049/2018 Page 1 of 3
Police Station Farsh Bazar, based on a settlement.

2. Subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have
settled their disputes through the process of mediation held before
Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, on 25.08.2018.

4. It is stated that the husband of respondent No.2 has expired in
the year 2012. Smt. Mahendri Devi, mother-in-law of respondent
No.2 has also expired on 26.07.2018.

5. Petitioners are the in-laws of respondent No.2. Initially there
was a settlement between the parties whereby they had agreed to pay a
sum of Rs.2,50,000/- to respondent No.2. Subsequently an MOU
dated 25.09.2018 has been executed. As per the MOU, respondent
No.2 has agreed to quashing of the subject FIR without receipt of any
further amount.

6. Respondent No.2 is present in person, represented by counsel
and is identified by the Investigating Officer and she is also
accompanied by her brother, Surender Khopa. Respondent No.2
submits that she has settled her disputes with the petitioners and does
not wish to prosecute the company any further and has no objection to
the quashing of the subject FIR.

7. In view of the fact that the proceedings emanate out of a

CRL.M.C. 5049/2018 Page 2 of 3
matrimonial discord and the parties have fully and finally settled their
disputes and the respondent No.2 has stated that she does not wish to
press the complaint any further, 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.269/2010
under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition
Act, Police Station Farsh Bazar and the consequent proceedings
emanating there from are quashed.

9. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

OCTOBER 03, 2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
‘AA’

CRL.M.C. 5049/2018 Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2018 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh