$~64
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 19.07.2018
+ CRL.M.C.3540/2018
TOSIF AHMAD ORS. ….. Petitioners
versus
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ANR. ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr.Vipin Arora, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, Addl. PP for
the State with SI Dinesh Kumar, P.S.Welcome.
Mr.Dilshad Ali, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
19.07.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl.M.A.28035/2018 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C.3540/2018
1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 467 of 2015 under
Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC Section 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act at Police Station Welcome, Delhi, based on a
settlement. It is contended that the FIR was lodged consequent to a
matrimonial discord.
CRL.M.C.3540/2018 Page 1 of 3
2. As per the settlement, a total sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- besides
Rs.30,000/- towards meher and Rs.12,000/- on account of Iddat
period was agreed to be paid to respondent no. 2. The said amount
has been paid which is acknowledged by respondent No.2 who is
present in Court in person.
3. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have
settled their disputes and have amicably dissolved their marriage by
mutual consent and have already been divorced as per the Shariat
Law. It is further submitted on behalf of the parties that parties had
entered into the settlement before the Mediation Centre, Karkardooma
Courts, Delhi dated 22.07.2017.
4. As per the settlement the minor child shall remain in the
permanent custody of respondent No.2. The petitioners who are
present in Court undertake that they shall not claim any rights
contrary to the settlement terms.
5. Learned counsels for the parties inform that other disputes
between the parties have also been resolved and proceedings have
been concluded on the basis of the subject settlement.
6. Respondent no. 2 is present in court in person, represented by
counsel and is identified by the IO. Respondent no. 2 submits that she
has settled the dispute with the petitioners and is agreeable to the
settlement and does not wish to press the criminal charges against the
CRL.M.C.3540/2018 Page 2 of 3
petitioners any further.
7. 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
there from.
8. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 467 of
2015 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC Section 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Welcome, Delhi, and the
consequent proceedings there from are, accordingly quashed.
9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JULY 19, 2018
rk
CRL.M.C.3540/2018 Page 3 of 3
