Delhi High Court
Kanishk Sharma & Ors. vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 31 August, 2017
$~27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 872/2017
KANISHK SHARMA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through Mr.Shafiq Khan, Adv. with
Mr.Tanveer Khaleeq, Adv.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through Mr.Rahul Mehra, Standing
Counsel (criminal) for State with Mr.Jamal
Akhtar, Adv. with SI Chhotelal, P.S. Punjabi
Bagh.
Mr.Mohd. Khadim Khan, Adv. for R-2 with
respondent no. 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
ORDER
% 31.08.2017
1. Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. She is duly identified
by the IO SI Chhotelal. She is being represented by her
counsel.
2. 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.673/2016, registered against
them on 10.11.2016 with Police Station Punjabi Bagh, Delhi,
under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, on the complaint of
respondent No.2.
3. The marriage of the petitioner No.1 with the respondent no. 2
was solemnized on 16.02.2009 as per Hindu rites and
ceremonies. However, no issue out of the said wedlock was
born.
4. After solemnization of their marriage, the petitioner no. 1 and
the respondent no. 2 started residing together 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 on 26.01.2016 and started living with her
parents.
5. The respondent no. 2 lodged a complaint on 8.4.2016 with
CAW Cell which culminated into said FIR. She had also filed
a petition under Section 125 of Cr.PC for maintenance against
the petitioner no.1 before Ld.Principal Judge, Family Court,
West District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi. She also preferred a
petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (in short 'DV Act') on 4.5.2016
before the court of learned MM, Mahila Court, West, Tis Hazari
Court, New Delhi.
6. Learned ASJ, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, in the above said FIR,
referred the parties to the Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Court,
Delhi. The parties had amicably resolved and settled all their
disputes before the learned Mediator on 21.1.2017.
7. As per the 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. The petitioner No.1 had also
agreed to pay a total sum of Rs.15,00,000/- to the respondent
no. 2 in full and final settlement of her all claims including the
maintenance and costs of dowry and stridhan articles.
8. Pursuant to the settlement, the petitioner no.1 had paid a sum of
Rs.4 lakh to the respondent no.2 at the time of recording the
statement of the parties in first motion. The petitioner no.1
further paid a sum of Rs.7 lakh to respondent No.2 at the time
of recording the statement of the parties in second motion.
Respondent no.2 submits that she had received Rs.2 lac from
the petitioner at the time of withdrawal of her petition under
section 125 Cr.P.C. On the last date of hearing, the respondent
no.2 received balance settlement amount of Rs.2 lac from the
petitioner in this Court.
9. Both, the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 submit that on
24.8.2017 a decree of divorce by mutual consent was passed by
the Court of Sh.Sudhir Kumar Jain, learned Principal Judge,
Family Court, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, dissolving their
marriage.
10. Pursuant to the mediation settlement, the respondent No.2
submits that she had withdrawn her petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C.
filed before the Ld.Principal Judge, Family Court, West
District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi. She had also withdrawn her
petition under Section 12 of D.V. Act from the court of learned
MM, Mahila Court, Delhi.
11. The respondent no. 2 states that she has voluntarily settled the
matter with the petitioners without any force or coercion and
she does not want to pursue the said FIR. She submits that she
has received the entire settlement amount from petitioner No.1.
She submits that the said FIR may be quashed.
12. Both the petitioners and respondent No.2 submit that they are
not to recover anything against each other. In these
circumstances, when the matter has been amicably settled
between the parties, no purpose would be served in further
pursuing the said FIR. Hence, to secure ends of justice, the FIR
bearing No.673/2016, registered against them on 10.11.2016
with Police Station Punjabi Bagh, Delhi, under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC and proceedings arising out of the same are
hereby quashed.
13. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
14. Dasti.
VINOD GOEL, J.
AUGUST 31, 2017/jitender
