Allowed

Mukesh @ Raju & Ors. v. the State ( Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Delhi HC14 Jan 2016W.P.(CRL)/40/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed FIR No. 182/2013 under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC and related proceedings following a settlement agreement and decree of divorce by mutual consent obtained by the parties, subject to the petitioners depositing Rs. 2,500 each in the Victims' Compensation Fund.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 182/2013 under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC and proceedings arising therefrom were set aside and quashed with a direction to deposit Rs. 2,500 each in the Victims' Compensation Fund.

Mukesh @ Raju & Ors. Vs the State ( Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**

¶3

Date of decision: 14^th January, 2016

¶4

+ W.P.(CRL) 40/2016 and Crl. MA No. 235/2016 (Exemption)

¶5

MUKESH @ RAJU & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Puneet Khurana, Advocate along with petitioner no. 1

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sanjay Lao, ASC (Crl.) SI Manish Kumar, P.S. Shalimar Bagh Mr. Rakesh Chaudhary, Adv. for Resp. no. 2/Complainant along with complainant

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

¶9

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)

¶10

The present is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶11

read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of FIR No. 182/2013 under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC registered at Police Station- Shalimar Bagh, Delhi and the proceedings arising therefrom.

¶12

The facts in brief are that the petitioner no. 1 (husband) and respondent No.2/complainant (wife) were married to each other according to

¶13

Page 1 of 5

¶14

Writ Petition (Crl.) 40/2016

¶15

Hindu rites and customs on 25^th April, 2012. Owing to temperamental and ideological differences between the parties to the marriage, they started living separately since 28^th September, 2012. No child has been born out of the said wedlock. On a complaint instituted by respondent no.2 (wife), the subject FIR was registered against the petitioner no. 1 (husband) and his family members.

¶16

Counsel for the parties state that the outstanding matrimonial dispute between the parties to the union has been settled amicably before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts, Delhi by way of a Settlement Agreement dated 19^th October, 2013. The salient terms and conditions of the afore-stated settlement are as follows:-

¶17

“1) It is mutually settled between the parties that complainant and applicant shall get dissolved their marriage by decree of divorce by mutual consent without leveling allegations and counter allegations against each other in accordance with law before the Court of competent jurisdiction at Delhi.

¶18

It is settled that the applicant/husband shall pay Rs. 3,00,000/(Rupees Three Lac only) to the complainant/wife as her full and final satisfaction qua all her claims (past, present & future) arising out of the marriage with him which shall include permanent alimony, istridhan, dowry articles, maintenance and all other miscellaneous expenses.

¶19

Page 2 of 5

¶20

Writ Petition (Crl.) 40/2016

¶21

The applicant/husband shall return the articles, as mentioned in the admitted list Annexure-A, which has been signed by both the parties at the time of hearing the bail application i.e. on 26.10.2013, before the Ld. Referral Court.

¶22

The settled amount will be paid in cash/DD by the accused/husband to the complainant/wife as under:-

¶23

(i) First installment of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) shall be paid at the time of recording statements in First Motion Petition U/s 13(B)(1) of Hindu Marriage Act which will be filed by the parties jointly within one month from today.

¶24

(ii) Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) shall be paid at the time of recording statements in Second Motion Petition U/s 13(B)(2) of Hindu Marriage Act which will be filed by the parties jointly after completion of stipulated period of six months.

¶25

(iii) The remaining amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) shall be paid to the complainant/wife by the applicant/husband at the time of quashing of FIR No. 182/2013 PS: Shalimar Bagh, U/s 498A/406/34 IPC, State vs. Mukesh & Ors. before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi after passing of decree of divorce in second motion petition. The complainant/wife shall cooperate in quashing of the said FIR.”

¶26

In a nutshell, it has been agreed by and between the parties to the

¶27

union that respondent no. 2 (wife) shall be paid a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs towards

¶28

Page 3 of 5

¶29

Writ Petition (Crl.) 40/2016

¶30

all her claims vis. a vis . permanent alimony, stridhan, dowry articles, maintenance past, present and future etc. against the petitioners.

¶31

Counsel for the parties further state that pursuant to the said settlement

¶32

between the parties to the union, the sum of Rs. 2 lakhs has already been received by respondent no.2 (wife). The balance sum of Rs. 1 lakh has been brought to the Court in the shape of Demand Draft dated 5^th January, 2016 bearing No. 208129 drawn on Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Gurgaon Branch, Haryana in favour of respondent no. 2(wife) herein. The latter acknowledges receipt thereof subject to its encashment.

¶33

In the present case, it is observed that pursuant to the settlement arrived at between the parties to the union, a decree of divorce by mutual consent dated 2^nd November, 2015 has already been obtained by the parties from the concerned Family Court, Rohini, Delhi.

¶34

Respondent No.2/complainant (wife), who is present in Court and has

¶35

been identified by the Investigating Officer i.e. SI Manish Kumar, Police Station- Shalimar Bagh, Delhi, states that in pursuance to the settlement arrived at between the parties to the union, she is no longer keen to proceed with the subject FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶36

Since the dispute between the parties which arose out of a matrimonial

¶37

Page 4 of 5

¶38

Writ Petition (Crl.) 40/2016

¶39

discord between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 and resulted in the registration of the subject FIR, has been settled amicably before the Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts, Delhi by way of a Settlement Agreement dated 19^th October, 2013 without any undue influence, pressure or coercion; as the parties have obtained decree of divorce by mutual consent on 2^nd November, 2015; and the settlement between the parties is lawful, no useful purpose will be served by proceeding with the subject FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom.

¶40

Resultantly, the FIR No. 182/2013 under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC registered at Police Station- Shalimar Bagh, Delhi and the proceedings arising therefrom are hereby set aside and quashed qua all the petitioners subject to each of the petitioners depositing a sum of Rs. 2,500/- each with the Victims’ Compensation Fund within a period of two weeks from today. A copy of the receipt thereof shall be provided to the Investigating Officer in the subject FIR.

¶41

With the above said directions, the writ petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶42

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J

¶43

JANUARY 14, 2016/sd

¶44

Page 5 of 5

¶45

Writ Petition (Crl.) 40/2016

Mukesh @ Raju & Ors. v. the State ( Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh @ Raju & Ors. v. the State ( Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav & Anr. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Hem Singh @ Hemu Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Mohd. Islam Vs State

Bijender Vs State

Sunil Kumar Bhatia Vs State of Delhi & Anr.

Rashid Ali Vs the State & Anr.

Ajit & Ors. Vs the State ( NCT of Delhi ) & Anr.

Mohammad Zaigham & Ors. Vs the State ( Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Shiv Kumar Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

Bijender Vs State

Anand Kumar Verma & Ors. Vs the State ( NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Sunil Kumar Bhatia Vs State of Delhi & Anr.

Mohammad Zaigham & Ors. Vs the State ( Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Sumit @ Sunny Walia Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.