W.P.(CRL)/1183/2017 of NAIM @ NAIMUDDIN & ORS Vs THE STATE & OTHER
Parties
- NAIM @ NAIMUDDIN & ORS (PETITIONER)
- THE STATE & OTHER (RESPONDENT)
Cites (1)
Full text
solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+W.P.(CRL) 1183/2017
NAIM @ NAIMUDDIN & ORS
..... Petitioners
Through:Mr. Saleem Malik, Adv.
versus
THE STATE & OTHER
..... Respondent
Through:Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for theStateMr. Pratap Dhaka and Mr. RajKumar, Advs. for R-2 & R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMARO R R%25.04.2017
CRL.M.A.6712/2017
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(CRL) 1183/2017
The petitioners have sought quashing of the FIR No.20/2015 dated06.01.2015 (P.S. Karawal Nagar) instituted for offences under Sections308/34 of the IPC.
The sister of the petitioner no.1 was married to respondent no.2 in theyear 2010. After about 4 years of the marriage, the sister of petitioner no.1,beingunhappy withtherelationshipinthemarriage,lodgedFIRNo.492/2014 for offences under Sections 498A, 406 and 34 of the IPC readwith Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Almost at the same time, the
brother of respondent no.2 also lodged FIR No.1046/2014 against thepetitioners for offences under Sections 336, 506 and 34 read with variousSections of Arms Act in different police station.This obviously hadrepercussions and respondent no.2 also lodged FIR No.20/2015 (P.S.Karawal Nagar) for offences under Section 308/34 IPC. However, with theintervention of the well-wishers and on taking into account the fact that nouseful purpose would be served in continuing investigation in these casesagainst the parties, settlement was arrived at. As part of the settlement,the sister of petitioner no.1 had to get divorce from respondent no.2 andrespondent no.2, in turn, agreed for quashing of all the pending litigationsagainst the petitioners.
It is submitted jointly before this Court that the sister of petitionerno.1 has been divorced now and no dispute remains between the parties. Aspart of the settlement, the respondent no.2 has paid all the amount towardsthe claims of his wife, who is the sister of petitioner no.1.
Considering the aforesaid facts, the subject FIR No.20/2015 dated06.01.2015 (P.S. Karawal Nagar) and all the emanating proceedingstherefrom are quashed.
The petition is disposed of.
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J
APRIL 25, 2017