Allowed

Sanjeev Vaid and Ors. v. State and Anr.

Delhi HC17 Feb 2017CRL.M.C./557/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought quashing of an FIR under 498A/406 IPC alleging matrimonial dispute. The Court found that divorce by mutual consent was granted and disputes were settled amicably with an agreement to pay ₹50,000. Consequently, the FIR and all arising proceedings were quashed in the interest of justice to enable parties to settle after divorce.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.233/2004 registered under Sections 498A/406 IPC and all proceedings arising therefrom in PS Janakpuri are quashed.

Sanjeev Vaid and Ors. Vs State and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~28

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 557/2016 & CRL.M.A.No.2326/16

¶4

SANJEEV VAID AND ORS ..... Petitioners Through : Mr.Sandeep Bajaj, Advocate along with petitioners in person.

¶5

versus STATE AND ANR ..... Respondents Through : Mr.Kamal K.Ghei, APP with SI Pramod Kumar, PS J.Puri. Mr.M.S.Yadav, Advocate for R2 along with R2 in person.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG O R D E R

¶8

% 17.02.2017

¶9

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.233/2004 registered under Sections 498A/406 IPC at PS Janakpuri. It is stated that the matter has been settled amicably with the complainant / respondent No.2.

¶10

Complainant / respondent No.2 is present with counsel and has been identified by the Investigating Officer. I have enquired from the complainant if she has settled the dispute with the petitioners amicably without any fear or pressure. She has informed that all the disputes between the parties have been resolved amicably with her free consent. Her only grievance is that she has not been given her dowry articles. It is informed that earlier petition was dismissed as withdrawn as the petitioners had declined to pay `50,000/- demanded by the complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioners denies it. He, CRL.M.C. 557/2016 page 1 of 2

¶11

however, agreed that `50,000/- shall be paid to the complainant within three weeks through the Investigating Officer without prejudice. On this, complainant has no objection to the quashing of the FIR in question. Divorce by mutual consent has already been granted.

¶12

The petition is supported by affidavits of the parties. Since the dispute between the parties has been settled, no useful purpose will be served to continue with the proceedings. In the interest of justice and to enable the parties to settle in life after divorce, FIR No.233/2004 registered under Sections 498A/406 IPC at PS Janakpuri and all the proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

¶13

`50,000/- shall be paid to the complainant within three weeks through the Investigating Officer. In case of non-compliance, the complainant will be at liberty to approach this Court. 5. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Pending application also stands disposed of.

¶14

S.P.GARG, J

¶15

FEBRUARY 17, 2017 / tr

¶16

page 2 of 2

¶17

CRL.M.C. 557/2016

Sanjeev Vaid and Ors. v. State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev Vaid and Ors. v. State and 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

Charanjeet Singh Vs State

Kartikeshan Mudaliyar & Ors. Vs Stat E & Ors.

Darshan Singh Khaira & Anr. Vs State

Dilbagh Singh Vs State & Anr.

Shiv Shankar Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

Deepak Dahiya Vs the State ( NCT of Delhi) & Anr.