Delhi High Court
Shiraz Ahmed vs State & Anr. on 9 July, 2018
$~27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 09.07.2018
+ CRL.M.C. 3339/2018
SHIRAZ AHMED ..... Petitioner
versus
STATE & ANR ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Simon Benjamin and Mr.Vipin Mittal, Advs.
For the Respondent: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Addl. PP for the State with SI
Ashwani, P.S.Jyoti Nagar.
Mr.S.A.Khan, Adv. for Respondent No.2 with
Respondent No. 2 in person.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
09.07.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl.M.A.12107/2018 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 3339/2018 & Crl.M.A.12106/2018
1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 94 of 2013 under
Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC read with Section 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act at Police Station Jyoti Nagar, Delhi, based on a
settlement. It is contended that the FIR was lodged consequent to a
matrimonial discord.
2. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have
settled their disputes and have amicably dissolved their marriage by
mutual consent and decree of divorce as per Muslim law has been
passed. It is further submitted on behalf of the parties that parties had
entered into the settlement before the Counselling Cell of the Family
court, Karkardooma, Shahdara, Delhi on 09.11.2017.
3. As per the settlement, a total sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- was agreed
to be paid to respondent no. 2. The amount of Rs. 2,65,000/- has
already been paid to respondent no. 2. The balance amount of
Rs.85,000/- has been paid by way of cash which is accepted by
respondent No.2.
4. Respondent no. 2 who is present in court in person and is
identified by the counsel. She confirms that she has received the
entire sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- from the petitioner. Respondent no. 2
submits that she has settled the dispute with the petitioner and is
agreeable to the settlement and does not wish to press the criminal
charges against the petitioner any further.
5. It is submitted by the parties that in terms of the settlement, the
proceedings which were initiated by respondent No.2 under the
Domestic Violence Act have already been withdrawn as settled.
6. As per the agreement, the permanent custody of the minor child
shall remain with the respondent No.2. The petitioner who is present
in Court in person undertakes that he shall no claim rights contrary to
the settlement terms. The undertaking is accepted.
7. In view of the fact that disputes between the petitioner and
respondent no. 2 emanate out of a matrimonial discord and have been
settled, 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
there from.
8. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 94 of
2013 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC read with Section 4 of
the Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Jyoti Nagar, Delhi, and
the consequent proceedings there from are, accordingly quashed.
9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JULY 09, 2018
rk
