Delhi High Court
Shobhit Singh & Ors. vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 16 August, 2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 16th August, 2017
+ W.P.(CRL) 2304/2017
SHOBHIT SINGH & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. R.P.S. Bhatti, Advocate
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Kamna Vohra, ASC for
State with S.I. G.C. Pal, Police Station Civil
Lines, Delhi.
Mr. Hoshiyar Singh, Advocate for R-2
alongwith respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
VINOD GOEL, J. (ORAL)
Crl.M.A. 13053/2017 (exemption)
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application is disposed of.
W.P.(CRL) 2304/2017
1. Notice. Learned ASC, who appears on an advance copy, accepts
the notice.
2. Notice to respondent No.2 also. She is present and accepts the
notice. She is duly identified by the IO S.I. G.C.Pal and is
represented by her counsel, Mr. Hoshiar Singh, who submits
that he has already filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent
No.2.
3. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.PC')
for quashing of the FIR bearing No.271/2016, registered on
19.10.2016 with Police Station Civil Lines, under Sections
341/323/506 and 34 of IPC on the complaint of respondent
No.2.
4. The marriage of the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 2
was solemnized on 13.12.2015 as per Hindu rites and
ceremonies at Burari, Delhi. No child was born out of this
wedlock.
5. The petitioner No.2 is the uncle (Mama) of petitioner No.1 and
petitioner No.3 is the mother of petitioner No.1.
6. After the solemnization of marriage, the petitioner No.1 and
respondent No.2 started residing in the matrimonial home. Due
to some temperamental differences between the petitioner no. 1
and the respondent no.2 they could not reconcile with each
other. Resultantly, the respondent no.2 left the matrimonial
home and started residing with her parents since 27.12.2015.
7. The respondent No.2 filed a petition under Section 125 of
Cr.P.C. before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Delhi for
maintenance against petitioner No.1. She also lodged the said
FIR against the petitioners.
8. The parties had amicably resolved their disputes. By this
settlement, the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 had decided
to part company of each other and obtain a decree of divorce by
mutual consent. It had also been settled that the petitioner no. 1
shall pay a total sum of Rs.5,70,000/- to the respondent no. 2 in
full and final settlement of all her claims including maintenance
and costs of dowry articles, etc.
9. Pursuant to this settlement, the respondent No.2 present in the
court states that she had withdrawn her petition under Section
125 of Cr.P.C from the court of learned Principal Judge, Family
Court, Delhi. At the time of recording the statement of the
parties in the first motion, a sum of Rs.5,70,000/- was paid by
the petitioner No.1 to respondent No.2.
10. The respondent No.2 present in the court submits that she had
already received the entire settlement amount from petitioner
No.1. She submits that she does not wish to pursue the said FIR.
She submits that she has amicably settled the matter with the
petitioners without any force, coercion or threat. She submits
that said FIR may be quashed.
11. Both the parties submit that now nothing is due and recoverable
by them against each other. Parties have amicably settled their
all disputes and no purpose would be served in further pursuing
with the FIR bearing No.271/2016, registered on 19.10.2016
with Police Station Civil Lines, Delhi, under Sections
341/323/506/34 IPC. Hence, to secure ends of justice, the FIR
bearing No. 271/2016, registered on 19.10.2016 with Police
Station Civil Lines, Delhi, under Sections 341/323/506/34 IPC
and proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.
12. The petition is disposed of.
VINOD GOEL, J.
AUGUST 16, 2017/sandeep
