Allowed

Manoj Tomar & Ors. v. State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Delhi HC29 Nov 2017CRL.M.C./4960/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an application for exemption from filing certified copies. In a connected criminal matter, the Court quashed an FIR and consequential proceedings under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC. The quashing was based on a compromise deed executed voluntarily by the complainant and the absence of opposition from the State APP.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 523/14 registered at PS Dabri under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom. Allowance of application for exemption from filing certified cop

Manoj Tomar & Ors. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr. — Domestic Violence | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~44

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 4960/2017 CRL.M.A. 19685/2017

¶4

MANOJ TOMAR & ORS ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Arbind Kumar, Adv. with petitioner in person.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr. Raghuvinder Varma, APP for State with ASI Ombir Singh, PS Dabri. Mr. A.K. Pathak, Mr. R.B. Upadhyay, Adv. for R2 with R2 in person.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 29.11.2017

¶10

CRL.M.A. 19685/2017

¶11

CRL.M.A. 19685/2017 is an application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking exemption from filing certified copies. The same is allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶12

The application is disposed of.

¶13

CRL.M.C. 4960/2017

¶14

IO of the case has identified the photographs of the petitioner no. 1 Manoj Kumar s/o Sh. Inderjeet Tomar (husband), petitioner no. 2 Inderjeet Tomar s/o Sh. Biri Singh Tomar (father-in-law), petitioner no. 3 Smt. Ramwati w/o Sh. Inderjeet Tomar (mother-in-law), petitioner no. 4 Rajeev Tomar and petitioner no. 5 Mr. Praveen Tomar both sons of Sh. Inderjeet Tomar (brothers-in-law / Dewar) as being the accused in FIR No. 523/14,

¶15

registered at PS Dabri, under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 and he has also identified the respondent no. 2 i.e. the complainant Smt. Anupma w/o Sh. Manoj Tomar of the FIR in question present today in court and photograph on the record, Ex.CW1A to Ex.CW1/F.

¶16

Vide the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of the FIR No. 523/14, registered at PS Dabri, under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 submitting to the effect that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties vide a Compromise Deed dated 18.09.2015 on Ex.CW2/A, which the respondent no. 2 i.e. the complainant Smt. Anupma w/o Sh. Manoj Tomar has signed voluntarily of their own accord without any duress or coercion from any quarter and that she has no opposition to the petition CRL.M.C. 4960/2017 filed by the petitioner no. 1 Manoj Kumar s/o Sh. Inderjeet Tomar (husband), petitioner no. 2 Inderjeet Tomar s/o Sh. Biri Singh Tomar (father-in-law), petitioner no. 3 Smt. Ramwati w/o Sh. Inderjeet Tomar (mother-in-law), petitioner no. 4 Rajeev Tomar and petitioner no. 5 Mr. Praveen Tomar both sons of Sh. Inderjeet Tomar (brothers-in-law / Dewar) seeking quashing of the FIR No. 523/14, registered at PS Dabri, under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 in as much as she has been living with the petitioner no. 1 Manoj Kumar s/o Sh. Inderjeet Tomar since 18.09.2015 and that the complainant has signed the said Compromise Deed dated 18.09.2015 voluntarily of her own accord without any duress or coercion from any quarter.

¶17

Learned APP for the State also in the circumstances of the case does not oppose the prayer made by the petitioner seeking quashing of the FIR No. 523/14, registered at PS Dabri, under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶18

Taking into account the statement made by the respondent no. 2 i.e. the complainant Smt. Anupma w/o Sh. Manoj Tomar that a settlement has been arrived at between the parties and that there is no reason to disbelieve that the respondent no. 2 i.e. the complainant Smt. Anupma w/o Sh. Manoj Tomar and the petitioner no. 1 Manoj Kumar s/o Sh. Inderjeet Tomar are residing together, thus it is considered appropriate in the interest of justice that the prayer made by the petitioner seeking quashing of the FIR No. 523/14, registered at PS Dabri, under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom is allowed, which is thus accordingly allowed, and the FIR No. 523/14, registered at PS Dabri, under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefore are quashed.

¶19

The petition is disposed of.

¶20

ANU MALHOTRA, J

¶21

NOVEMBER 29, 2017/MK

Manoj Tomar & Ors. v. State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Tomar & Ors. v. State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Anwar Vs State of Delhi & Ors.

Kuldeep Singh Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Daljeet Singh & Ors. Vs State & Anr.

Dr. Narain Dutt Shrimali Foundation Vs D.D.A.

Sachin Yadav & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Keshav Kumar Pandey & Ors. Vs State & Anr.