Allowed

Pawan Chauhan & Ors. v. State ( NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Delhi HC2 Jul 2018W.P.(CRL)/1897/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court through the Criminal side allowed a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act following a mutual settlement and divorce.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.156/2017 and all subsequent proceedings under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are quashed.

Pawan Chauhan & Ors. Vs State ( NCT of Delhi) & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~9

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 1897/2018 PAWAN CHAUHAN & ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Anil Sharma and Mr.Aman Bhardwaj, Advocates

¶4

versus

¶5

STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for the State with ASI Radhey Shyam, PS Karawal Nagar Moh.Shariq, Advocate for R-2

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

% 02.07.2018

¶9

Crl.M.A.No.11711/2018

¶10

Allowed subject to just exceptions.

¶11

W,P.(Crl.) No.1897/2018

¶12

By the present petition, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.156/2017 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered at PS Karawal Nagar on the complaint of respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.

¶13

Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on instructions submits that in the above noted FIR the seven petitioners are the only W.P.(CRL) 1897/2018 page 1 of 3

¶14

accused and respondent No.2 is the only complainant/victim.

¶15

Respondent No.2 who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel and Investigating Officer states that she has settled the matter with the petitioners vide settlement arrived at between the parties on 11^th January, 2018 in Crl.A.No.79/2017 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge copy whereof is annexed as Annexure P-3 to the present petition. In terms of the settlement marriage between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2/complainant has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. As full and final settlement of all the claims, that is, maintenance, streedhan and alimony etc. of the respondent No. 2, the petitioner No.1 has to pay a sum of ₹9 lakhs to respondent No.2 out of which she has already received a sum of ₹6 lakhs and the balance amount of ₹3 lakhs has been received by her today in Court vide demand draft No.059470 drawn on Bank of Baroda. Further as per the settlement, respondent No.2 has also received her jewellery articles. She further states that she has no claim whatsoever remaining against the petitioners. In terms of the settlement she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. She undertakes to abide by the terms of settlement.

¶16

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 settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶17

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) 1897/2018 page 2 of 3

¶18

page 2 of 3

¶19

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.

¶20

Consequently, FIR No.156/2017 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act registered at PS Karawal Nagar and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.

¶21

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

¶22

Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

¶23

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

¶24

JULY 02, 2018 mamta

¶25

page 3 of 3

¶26

W.P.(CRL) 1897/2018

Pawan Chauhan & Ors. v. State ( NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Chauhan & 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Singh Chautala Vs the State (Nct of Delhi)

Sushil Sharma Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Others

Rohtas Vs State of Delhi &Ors

Archana Vs the State ( Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

Ameen Khan & Ors. Vs the State & Anr.

Kailash Wati Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi

Hira Lal Prasad Vs the Commissioner of Police & Ors.

Yogesh Vs State (Gnct of Delhi)

Piyush Kr Gupta Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Abdul Kalam Vs State of Delhi

Sukhbir Singh Gouchwal Vs the State

Yogesh Sharma @ Rahul Sharma Vs the State ( Govt of NCT Delhi)

Ram Kumar & Ors. Vs the State of Delhi & Anr.