Sanjay & Ors. vs The State ( Nct) Of Delhi & Anr.
2018 Latest Caselaw 4242 Del

$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                   Judgment delivered on: 24.07.2018

+      CRL.M.C. 2714/2018
SANJAY & ORS                                           ..... Petitioners

                           versus

THE STATE ( NCT) OF DELHI& ANR                         ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners :      Ms. Shanu Raina with Mr. Devesh Kumar, Advs.

For the Respondent:        Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, APP for the State with SI
                           Jasmer Singh, PS Jahangir Puri

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                              JUDGMENT

24.07.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) Crl. M.A. 9638/2018(Exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.A. 9639/2018 For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 21 days in refiling is condoned.

Application is allowed.

CRL.M.C. 2714/2018 & CRL.M.A.9637/2018

1. The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.787 of 2006 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, Police Station Jahangir Puri, New Delhi, based on a settlement.

2. Subject FIR emanates out of a matrimonial discord. Petitioner No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2. is the father-in-law of the respondent No.2. Petitioner No.3 is the mother-in-law of the respondent No.2. Petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are the brothers-in-law of the respondent No.2. Petitioner No.6 is the sister-in-law of the respondent No.2.

3. Petitioners and respondent No.2 who appears in person submit that they have settled their disputes before the Family Courts, Rohini and Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have started living together amicably as husband and wife. Respondent No.2 further submits that she has settled all her disputes with her husband and does not wish to prosecute the complaint either against her husband or against her father-in-law, mother-in-law, brothers-in-law and sister-in-law who are petitioner Nos.2 to 6. She submits that in view of the fact that she has settled with her husband and wants to restore the family ties, she wants that the FIR be quashed.

4. In view of the fact that the disputes between the parties have been settled and Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have started living together, 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.

5. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.787 of 2006 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC at Police Station Jahangir Puri, New Delhi and the consequent proceedings therefrom are, accordingly quashed.

6. Order Dasti under signature of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J JULY 24, 2018 ns