W.P.(CRL)/664/2017 of AMIT GOEL & ORS Vs STATE & ANR
Parties
- AMIT GOEL & ORS (PETITIONER)
- STATE & ANR (RESPONDENT)
Cites (0 resolved of 1 detected)
1 case citation detected in this judgment's own text, but none resolved to a judgment page in this build yet.
Statutes cited (2)
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) 664/2017
AMIT GOEL & ORS ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Ajay Kumar Chopra with Mr. Walter Menezes, Advs. versus
STATE & ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr. Piyush Singha, Adv. for Mr. Ashish Agarwal, ASC with SI Brij Mohan, PS Mansarover park. R-2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R R% 02.03.2017 Crl.M.A. 3609/2017
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
WP(Crl.) 664/2017
By the present petition, the Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 234/2015 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Mansarover Park on the complaint of Respondent No.2 and proceedings pursuant thereto as the parties have settled the matter.
Learned proxy counsel for learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on instructions from the investigating officer states that in the above noted FIR the four petitioners are the only accused and respondent No.2 the only complainant/victim.
Respondent No.2 who is present in Court and identified by the investigating officer states that she has settled the matter with the petitioners before the Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi copy of which is placed at pages 35 to 39 of the paper book. Pursuant to the settlement, divorce by mutual consent has been granted between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2. In lieu of
all her claims towards maintenance/istridhan/permanent alimony etc. respondent No.2 has to receive total sum of ₹29 lakhs which she has already received. She states that she has now no grievance against the petitioners and will abide by the terms of settlement. She does not wish to pursue the above noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3, who are present in Court and identified by learned counsel, affirm the statement of respondent No.2 and state that they will abide by the terms of settlement. Petitioner No.4 who is teacher and is taking exam today is exempted from appearing before the Court.
In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.
Consequently, FIR No. 234/2015 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Mansarover Park, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.
The petition is disposed of. Order dasti.
MARCH 02, 2017 ‘v mittal’
MUKTA GUPTA, J.