Delhi High Court
Mr. Rajat Sahagal vs State & Anr. on 19 July, 2018
$~62
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 19.07.2018
+ CRL.M.C.3532/2018
MR.RAJAT SAHAGAL ..... Petitioner
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr.V.K.Vats and Mr.R.K.Sharma, Advs.
For the Respondent: Mr.Kamal Kumar Ghai, Addl. PP for
the State with SI Imran Khan, P.S.Paschim Vihar.
Ms.Manie Ahuja, Adv.for R-2.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
19.07.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl.M.A.28013/2018 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C.3532/2018
1. The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 322 of 2009 under
Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC at Police Station Paschim Vihar,
New Delhi, based on a settlement. It is contended that the FIR was
lodged consequent to a matrimonial discord. Settlement terms were
recorded at the time of the passing of the order on the first motion on
08.12.2016.
2. As per the settlement, a total sum of Rs. 18,00,000/- was
agreed to be paid to respondent no. 2. The amount of Rs. 12,00,000/-
has already been paid to respondent no. 2. The balance amount of
Rs.6,00,000/- has been paid by way of Demand draft No.038354 dated
24.05.2018 drawn on HFDC Bank.
3. 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 filed before the Family Court,
Tis Hazari Courts dated 23.01.2018 has been passed. It is further
submitted on behalf of the parties that parties had entered into the
settlement dated 08.12.2016.
4. As per the settlement terms, the permanent custody of the minor
child is with respondent No.2. The petitioner who is present in Court
undertakes that he shall not claim any rights contrary to the settlement
terms. The undertaking is accepted.
5. Learned counsel for the parties inform that other disputes
between the parties have also been resolved and proceedings have
been concluded on the basis of the subject settlement.
6. Respondent no. 2 who is present in court in person, represented
by counsel, is identified by the IO. Respondent no. 2 submits that she
has settled the dispute with the petitioners and is agreeable to the
settlement and does not wish to press criminal charges against the
petitioners any further.
7. In view of the fact that the disputes between the petitioners 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. 322 of
2009 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC at Police Station
Paschim Vihar, New Delhi, and the consequent proceedings
emanating there from are, accordingly quashed.
9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JULY 19, 2018
rk
