Delhi High Court
Mukesh @ Jagminder @ Ors. vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr on 29 April, 2016
44
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 29th April, 2016
W.P.(CRL) 1315/2016 & CRL.M.A. 6926/2016
MUKESH @ JAGMINDER @ ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr Tarun Dabas, Advocate.
versus
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Ananya Mohan, Advocate for Mr Avi
Singh, Addl. Standing Counsel (Crl.).
Ms Garima Gupta, Advocate for R-2.
SI Sonu Ram, PS- Vijay Vihar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J. (ORAL)
1. The present is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking
quashing of FIR No.701/2013 under Sections 406/498-A/34 IPC registered at
Police Station- Vijay Vihar, Delhi.
2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner no.1 (husband) and respondent
no.2/complainant (wife) were married to each other according to Hindu rites
and customs on 08.04.2012. Owing to temperamental and ideological
differences between the parties to the marriage, they started living separately
since 05.07.2012. No child has been born out of the said wedlock. On a
complaint instituted by respondent no.2 (wife), the subject FIR was registered
against the petitioner no.1(husband) and his family members.
3. Counsel for the parties state that with the aid and assistance of Family
Court, Rohini, Delhi, the outstanding matrimonial dispute between the parties to
the union has been settled amicably. The salient terms and conditions of the
settlement as recorded in the joint statement dated 07.12.2015 of the parties
before the Principal Judge (North-West), Family Courts, Rohini, Delhi, are as
follows:-
"As per the settlement, the petitioner no.1 has agreed to pay
a total sum of Rs.50,000/- to the petitioner no. 2 towards
full and final settlement of all her claims in respect of
dowry/stridhan articles, maintenance - past, present and
future, and permanent alimony and after receipt f the said
total sum, no claim shall be left against each other and each
other's family members qua the marriage. Out of the said
total sum o Rs.50,000/-, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- has already
been paid by petitioner no.1 to the petitioner no.2 at the
time of recording statements of first motion and today
petitioner no.1 has paid a sum of Rs.20,000/- in cash to
petitioner no.2. The balance amount of Rs.10,000/- shall be
paid by petitioner no.1 to petitioner no.2 at the time of
quashing of FIR bearing no. 701/13, U/s 498A/406/34 IPC,
PS Vijay Vihar, before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
We shall have no right, title, claim or interest of any nature
whatsoever against each other in the properties in our
possession and our family members possession or
acquired/obtained din future.
We both undertake to abide by the terms and conditions as
mentioned in the joint petition Ex. P-A as well as our joint-
statement recorded today.
We both further undertake to withdraw all the
cases/complaints, if any, filed against each other and not to
file any complaint/case/suit against each other or our
respective family members in future before any Court of
law or authority in respect to our matrimonial relations or
any other claim arising out of it."
4. In a nutshell, it has been agreed by and between the parties to the union
that respondent no. 2 (wife) shall be paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards all her
claims vis. a vis. permanent alimony, dowry articles, maintenance past, present
and future etc. against the petitioners.
5. Counsel for the parties further state that pursuant to the said settlement
dated 07.12.2015, a sum of Rs.40,000/- has already been received by respondent
no.2 (wife). The balance sum of Rs.10,000/- has been handed over to the
respondent no.2 in court today in cash. The respondent no.2 acknowledges
receipt thereof.
6. In the present case, it is observed that pursuant to the settlement arrived at
between the parties to the union, a decree of divorce by mutual consent dated
07.12.2015 has already been obtained by the parties from the concerned Family
Court, Rohini, Delhi.
7. Respondent No.2/complainant (wife), who is present in Court and has
been duly identified by the IO in the subject FIR, namely, SI Sonu Ram, PS-
Vijay Vihar, Delhi, states that in pursuance to the settlement arrived at between
the parties to the union, she is no longer keen to proceed with the subject FIR.
8. Since the dispute between the parties which arose out of a matrimonial
discord between the petitioners and respondent no. 2 and resulted in the
registration of the subject FIR, has been settled amicably without any undue
influence, pressure or coercion; as the parties have obtained decree of divorce
by mutual consent; and since the settlement between the parties is lawful, no
useful purpose will be served by proceeding with the subject FIR.
9. Resultantly, FIR No.701/2013 under Sections 406/498-A/34 IPC
registered at Police Station- Vijay Vihar, Delhi, is hereby set aside and quashed
qua the petitioners.
10. With the above directions, the writ petition is allowed and disposed of
accordingly.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
APRIL 29, 2016
mk
