Delhi High Court
Poonam Sharma vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 21 August, 2018
$~58
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 21.08.2018
+ CRL.M.C. 4217/2018
POONAM SHARMA ..... Petitioner
versus
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr. M.M. Khan with Ms. Faise, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Raghuvender Verma, APP for the State.
Mr. Rajat Wadhwa with Mr. Raviyanay Singh,
Advocates for the complainant.
SI Ajay Kumar, PS Kirti Nagar.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
21.08.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl.M.A.30369/2018 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 4217/2018
1. The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.478/2013 under
Sections 385/506 IPC, Police Station Kirti Nagar.
2. The allegations in the FIR are that the petitioner accused had
procured a false marriage certificate and threatened the complainant.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have
settled their disputes. Parties have even jointly applied for divorce by
mutual consent and the First Motion had already been allowed on
01.08.2018.
4. Parties, who are present in Court in person, undertake that they
shall apply for the Second Motion in accordance with law. The
undertaking is accepted.
5. Learned APP for the State informs that the police has even filed
a cancellation report and the same is still pending consideration.
6. The respondent No.2 complainant has agreed to pay a total sum
of Rs.45,00,000/- to the petitioner in lieu of present, past and future
maintenance, cost of litigation, permanent alimony etc. Out of the
said total sum, Rs.30,00,000/- has already been paid by the respondent
No.2 complainant, which is acknowledged by the petitioner, who is
present in person in Court. The respondent No.2, who is present in
person, undertakes that the balance amount of Rs.15,00,000/- shall be
paid at the time of the recording of the statement on the Second
Motion. The undertaking is accepted.
7. The respondent No.2 complainant is present in person,
represented by counsel and is identified by the Investigating Officer.
He submits that he has settled his disputes with the petitioner and does
not wish to prosecute the complaint any further and has no objection
to the quashing of the subject FIR.
8. In view of the fact that the parties have resolved their disputes
and respondent No. 2 does not wish to press his complaint,
continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and
justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put
to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the
ultimate guiding factor. It would be expedient to quash the subject
FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.
9. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.478/2013
under Sections 385/506 IPC, Police Station Kirti Nagar and the
consequent proceedings emanating there from are quashed.
10. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
AUGUST 21, 2018
st
