Allowed

Manish Bajaj & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC16 Jan 2018W.P.(CRL)/127/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC alleging domestic cruelty. The court held that since parties settled matters via a Memorandum of Understanding regarding mutual divorce and waived claims for maintenance or streedhan, the FIR and related proceedings were quashed.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 73/2017 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at PS Crime (Women) Cell, Nanak Pura, Delhi and all proceedings pursuant thereto were quashed against the accused.

Manish Bajaj & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

43# $~

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DE	LHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 127/2018
MANISH BAJAJ & ORS Represented by: versus	..... Petitioners Mr. Sushil Bhati and Mr. Ghanshyam Naagar, Advocates with petitioners in person.
THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF D Represented by:	ELHI & ANR..... Respondents Ms. Purnima Malik, Advocate for Mr. Avi Singh, Additional Standing Counsel for State with ASI Balwant Singh, PS CWC Nanak Pura. Mr. Kuldeep Vashisth, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person.

¶3

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶4

O R D E R % 16.01.2018

¶5

Crl. M.A. No. 807/2018 (Exemption)

¶6

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶7

W.P.(CRL) 127/2018

¶8

By the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 73/2017 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Crime (Women) Cell, Nanak Pura, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.

¶9

W.P.(CRL) 127/2018

¶10

Learned proxy counsel for the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on instructions from Investigating Officer submits that in the above-noted the three petitioners are the only accused and the respondent No.2 is the only complainant/ victim.

¶11

Respondent No. 2 who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel and the Investigating Officer states that she has settled the matter with the Petitioners vide Memorandum of Understanding dated 7^th December, 2017. In terms of the settlement statement for first motion for divorce by mutual consent has already been recorded and the parties will go ahead for recording of the statement for divorce by mutual consent. She also states that she has neither claimed any maintenance, streedhan, alimony etc. nor she will claim any maintenance, streedhan and alimony etc. from the petitioners. In terms of the settlement she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. She also states that she will abide by the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties on 7^th December, 2017.

¶12

Petitioners who are present in Court and are identified by the learned counsel affirm the statement of respondent No.2 and undertake to abide by the terms of Memorandum of Understanding dated 7^th December, 2017 arrived at between the parties. The petitioner No. 1 further states that he will cooperate with the respondent No.2 in recording of the statement for second motion for divorce by mutual consent.

¶13

In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, rather the W.P.(CRL) 127/2018 Page 2 of 3

¶14

same would create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

¶15

Consequently, FIR No. 73/2017 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Crime (Women) Cell, Nanak Pura, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed against all the accused.

¶16

Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.

¶17

Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

¶18

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

¶19

JANUARY 16, 2018 ‘vn’

¶20

Page 3 of 3

¶21

W.P.(CRL) 127/2018

Manish Bajaj & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Bajaj & Ors. v. the State Govt of 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

Anil Kothari Jain Vs State of NCT Delhi

Komal Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Mohd Amir & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rahul Mathur & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Darshan Chauhan Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Geeta & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Vikram Soni Vs State & Anr.

Kamal Tyagi Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Ritesh & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sanjeev Aggarwal Vs State & Anr.

Anup Gupta Vs State & Anr.

Amarjit Singh Vs State

Parvez Ali & Anr. Vs State

Sunil Tyagi Vs State (Govt of NCT Delhi)