CRL.M.C./423/2020 of SH. TILAK RAJ & ORS. Vs STATE & ANR.

Court: Delhi High Court
Decision date: 2020-01-27
Bench: NAMELY PARAS
Case number: 423/2020

Parties

SH. TILAK RAJ & ORS (PETITIONER)
STATE & ANR (RESPONDENT)

Cites (1)

CRL.M.C./853/2017 of NITISH KUMAR Vs STATE & ORS. (2018)

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

Date of decision: 27.01.2020

+ CRL.M.C. 423/2020

SH. TILAK RAJ & ORS.

..... Petitioners

Through Mr. Lajpat Rai and Mr. Joginder, Advs.

versus

STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, APP for State Ms. Mamta, Adv. for R-2 with respondent no.2 in person Mr. Praveen Kumar, IO, PS Madan, PS Ranhola

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

J U M N T (ORAL)

Crl. M.A. 1762/2020

1.Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.Application is disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 423/2020

3.Vide the present petition, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR

No.0581/2017 dated 28.08.2017 registered at Police Station Ranhola and

consequent proceedings arising therefrom.

4.Notice issued.

5.Notice is accepted by learned APP for the State and counsel for the respondent no.2 and with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present petition is taken up for final disposal.

6.The petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 got married on 25.06.2012 as

per Hindu rites and rituals. One child was born out of the wedlock, namely

Paras, in the year 2008. Due to extreme incompatibilities between the petitioners and respondent no.2, they started living separately.

7.The petitioners and respondent no.2 with the intervention of their well wishers and relatives entered into an amicable settlement out of Court on 05.11.2017 and settled all their disputes amicably.

8.The complainant is present in person and has been identified by SI Praveen Kumar of Police Station Rahola and submits that matter has been

settled and now she has been living with her husband, therefore, she does not wish to prosecute the petitioners any further.

9.Taking into account the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to quash the FIR as no useful purpose would be served in prosecuting the petitioners any further.

10.For the reasons afore-recorded, the FIR No.0581/2017 dated 28.08.2017 registered at Police Station Ranhola and consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

11.The petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

12.Order dasti

(SURESH KUMAR KAIT) JUDGE

JANUARY 27, 2020 MS