SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sunil Kumar vs The State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi ) & … on 12 October, 2017

$~45
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 2872/2017
SUNIL KUMAR ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr.Rajinder Juneja, Advocate along
with petitioner in person.

versus

THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ) ANR…. Respondents
Through: Mr.Sanjay Lao, ASC for State with SI
Gajender Singh, PS CWC, Malviya Nagar, Delhi.
Respondent no. 2 in person.

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
ORDER

% 12.10.2017

1. Notice. Learned ASC, who appears on an advance copy having been
served, accepts notice.

2. Notice to respondent no. 2 also. She appears in person and accepts
notice. She is duly identified by IO SI Gajender Singh.

3. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ‘Cr.PC’) for quashing of
the FIR bearing No. 180/2016, registered against him on 05.10.2016
with Police Station CWC, Nanak Pura, District Special Police Unit for
Women and Children, Delhi, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC on the
complaint of respondent No.2.

4. The marriage of the petitioner with the respondent no. 2 was
solemnized on 28.11.2010 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies in Delhi.

W.P. (Crl.) No. 2872/2017 Page 1 of 3

Out of this wedlock, one male child namely Aryan Kumar was born
on 25.11.2012.

5. After solemnization of their marriage, the petitioner and the
respondent no.2 started residing together in the matrimonial home.
After the birth of the child, due to some temperamental differences
between the petitioner and the respondent no.2, they could not
reconcile with each other. Resultantly, the respondent no.2 left the
matrimonial home and started residing separately.

6. The mother of the respondent No.2 lodged a complaint against the
petitioner before the CAW Cell which culminated into the said FIR.
The respondent no. 2 preferred a petition under Section 125 of Cr.PC
against the petitioner in the court of learned Principal Judge, Family
Court, Tis Hazari, Delhi for maintenance against the petitioner.

7. The petitioner also preferred a petition bearing No. GS-10/2016 under
Section 7 and 25 of the Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890 for
custody of the child before learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Patiala House Courts, Delhi.

8. On 20.03.2017, the parties had amicably resolved and settled all their
disputes before the learned Principal Counsellor attached to the
learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Patiala House Courts, New
Delhi in the Guardianship petition bearing No. GS-10/2016. As per
the settlement, the petitioner and the respondent no. 2 had decided to
reside together peacefully. The petitioner had agreed to bear all
household expenses including their child’s education etc. It was
further decided that both the parties shall withdraw their respective
petitions filed against each other.

W.P. (Crl.) No. 2872/2017 Page 2 of 3

9. The respondent No.2 states that she had voluntarily settled and
resolved her all disputes with the petitioner without any force and
coercion.

10. The petitioner had withdrawn his petition under Section 7 25 of the
Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890 on 22.05.2017 from the concerned
court. The respondent no. 2 had also withdrawn her petition filed
under Section 125 of Cr.PC from the concerned court.

11. The petitioner and the respondent no.2 submit that they have been
residing together since April, 2017 and they do not have dispute or
problem with each other. Respondent no. 2 submits that she does not
want to pursue the said FIR. She submits that the said FIR may be
quashed.

12. Learned ASC through the IO submits that the charge sheet has so far
not been filed.

13. Since the parties have amicably settled their all disputes, no fruitful
purpose would be served in further pursuing the said FIR. Hence, to
secure ends of justice, the FIR bearing No. 180/2016, registered on
05.10.2016 with Police Station CWC, Nanak Pura, District Special
Police Unit for Women and Children, Delhi, under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC and proceedings arising out of the said FIR are
hereby quashed.

14. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

15. DASTI.

VINOD GOEL, J.

OCTOBER 12, 2017
“shailendra”

W.P. (Crl.) No. 2872/2017 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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh