CRL.M.C./1385/2018 of PRAMOD KUMAR & ANR Vs THE STATE & ANR

Court: Delhi High Court
Decision date: 2018-03-19
Bench: DELHI, TIS HAZARI COURTS
Case number: 1385/2018

Parties

PRAMOD KUMAR & ANR (PETITIONER)
THE STATE & ANR (RESPONDENT)

Cites (1)

TEST.CAS./31/2003 of MOHINDER SINGH Vs THE STATE AC+ (2017)

Statutes cited (1)

indian penal code (1860)

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

Show all Body

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+CRL.M.C. 1385/2018

PRAMOD KUMAR & ANR

..... Petitioners

Through:Mr. Dinesh Prasad and Mr. GautamKumar, Advs.

versus

THE STATE & ANR

..... RespondentsThrough:Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Addl. PP for theState with SI Ramakant

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVAO R R%19.03.2018

Crl. M.A. No. 5043/2018 (Exemption)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 1385/2018

1.The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 135 of 2006 underSections 498A/406/34 of the IPC Police Station Sarai Rohilla, Delhi, basedon settlement. It is contended that the FIR was lodged consequent to amatrimonial discord.

2.Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have settledtheir disputes and have amicably dissolved their marriage by mutualconsent in the year 2009 and decree of divorce has been passed.

3.Respondent no. 2 is present in court in person and is identified bythe Investigating Officer. She submits that she has settled the dispute with

the petitioners and is agreeable to the settlement and does not wish to pressthe criminal charges against the petitioners any further. It is submitted onbehalf of the parties that parties had entered into the settlement on21.08.2017 before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

4.In view of the fact that the disputes between the petitioner andrespondent no. 2 emanate out of matrimonial discord and have beensettled, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futilityand justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put toan end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimateguiding factor. It would be expedient to quash the subject FIR and theconsequent proceedings emanating therefrom.

5.In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 135 of 2006under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC Police Station Sarai Rohilla, Delhiand the consequent proceedings therefrom are, accordingly quashed.

6.Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

MARCH 19, 2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J