Delhi High Court
Vishal @ Aashu & Ors vs The State Nct Of Delhi & Ors. on 21 September, 2017
$~1 & 59
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2200/2017
VISHAL @ AASHU & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Gulshan Kumar Sharma, Advocate
along with petitioners in person.
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP for the State
with SI Sandeep, PS South Rohini, Delhi. Mr.
R.K. Bachan, Advocate for R-2 and Respondent
No.2 in person.
+ W.P.(CRL) 1643/2017
VINOD & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. R.K. Bachan, Advocate with along
with petitioners in person.
versus
STATE DELHI ADMIN & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC with
Mr.Sachin Gupta, Advocate with SI Sandeep PS
South Rohini, Delhi.
Mr. Gulshan Kr. Sharma, Advocate for R-2 along
with respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
CRL. M.C 2200/2017 &
W.P. (CRL). No.1643 /2017, Page 1 of 5
ORDER
% 21.09.2017
CRL.M.C. 2200/2017
1. Notice. Mr.Srivastava, learned APP for State accepts notice. Status
report has already been filed.
2. Learned APP through the IO submits that the charge sheet has already
been filed against the petitioners.
3. Notice to the respondent no. 2 also. The respondent No.2 appears in
person and accepts the notice. She is represented by her counsel. She
is duly identified by IO SI Sandeep.
4. The petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.P.C.) for quashing of
the FIR bearing No.227/2015, registered on 16.03.2015 against them,
with Police Station South Rohini, Outer District, Delhi under Sections
323/341/354/506/34 IPC on the complaint of respondent no.2.
W.P.(CRL) 1643/2017
5. This matter has been received on transfer by the orders of Hon'ble the
Acting Chief Justice.
6. Notice. Mr. Mahajan, learned ASC for State accepts notice. Status
report has already been filed.
7. Learned ASC through the IO submits that the charge sheet has already
been filed against the petitioner no. 1 and 2. It is pointed out that the
petitioner no.3 is a juvenile. During the investigation nothing
incriminating was found against him.
8. Notice to the respondent no. 2 also. The respondent No.2 appears in
CRL. M.C 2200/2017 &
person and accepts notice. She is represented by her counsel. She is
duly identified by SI Sandeep.
9. 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.225/2015, registered on 18.03.2015 against them
with Police Station South Rohini, Outer District, Delhi, under
Sections 354/354D/509/506/34 IPC on the complaint of respondent
No.2.
CRL.M.C. 2200/2017 & W.P. (Crl.) 1643/2017
10. It is submitted that one Ms.Kirti, who is the daughter of petitioner
no.1 Vinod is married to the brother of Ms.Savita, who is the
respondent no. 2 in W.P. (Crl.) 1643/22017. There were some
matrimonial disputes between Ms. Kirti D/o Sh. Vinod (the petitioner
no.1) and Vikas, who is the brother of respondent no.2 Savita. They
submit that both the FIRs are the offshoot of the matrimonial disputes
between Ms.Kirti and Mr.Vikas.
11. Ms.Kirti, who is the daughter of Vinod filed a petition under Section
12 of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
(hereinafter referred to as the 'DV Act') against her husband Vikas
(brother of respondent no.2 Ms.Savita) in the court of learned MM,
Mahila Court, North-West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi.
12. On making a reference by the learned MM, Mahila Court, North-West
District, Rohini, Delhi, all the parties appeared before the Delhi
CRL. M.C 2200/2017 &
Mediation Centre, Rohini Court, Delhi. On 17.09.2016, all the parties
have amicably settled and resolved all their disputes. Ms.Kirti and
Mr.Vikas had decided to part company of each other by obtaining a
divorce by mutual consent. Mr.Vikas had agreed to pay Rs.1,20,000/-
to Ms.Kirti in full and final settlement of all her claims. The
respondent no. 2/complainant Ms.Seema in Crl.M.C. 2200/2017, and
the respondent no.2/complainant Ms.Savita in W.P. (Crl.) 1643/2017
had agreed not to pursue their respective FIRs.
13. It is submitted that learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohini,
Delhi had passed a decree of divorce on 21.08.2017 whereby the
marriage between Ms.Kirti and Mr.Vikas was dissolved.
14. The respondent no. 2/Ms.Seema in Crl.M.C. 2200/2017 and the
respondent no.2/Ms.Savita in W.P. (Crl.) 1643/2017 submit that in
view of the settlement between the parties, they do not want to pursue
the said FIRs. They submit that their respective FIRs may be
quashed.
15. Since the parties had amicably settled all their disputes, no fruitful
purpose would be served in further pursuing the said FIRs. (1) FIR
bearing No.227/2015, registered on 16.03.2015 with Police Station
South Rohini, Outer District, Delhi under Sections
323/341/354/506/34 IPC (2) FIR bearing No.225/2015, registered on
18.03.2015 with Police Station South Rohini, Outer District, Delhi,
under Sections 354/354D/509/506/34 IPC and proceedings arising out
of the said FIRs are hereby quashed.
CRL. M.C 2200/2017 &
16. Both the petitions are disposed of accordingly.
17. Order Dasti.
VINOD GOEL, J.
SEPTEMBER 21, 2017
"shailendra"
CRL. M.C 2200/2017 &
