Quashed

Surjeet Singh Gujral & Ors. v. the State ( NCT of Delhi)& Anr.

Delhi HC9 Jul 2018W.P.(CRL)/1976/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi quashed FIR No.168/2016 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC. The petitioners sought quashing based on a post-accusation settlement and divorce decree. The Court held that continued proceedings would serve no useful purpose and create further acrimony.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.168/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and proceedings pursuant thereto quashed.

Surjeet Singh Gujral & Ors. Vs the State ( NCT of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~60

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 1976/2018

¶4

SURJEET SINGH GUJRAL & ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Ranvir Vats and Mr.Vaibhav Arora, Advocates

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE ( NCT OF DELHI)& ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Sanjay Lao, ASC for the State with ASI Jay Prakash, PS CWC Nanak Pura Mr.Abraham, Advocate for R-2

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 09.07.2018

¶10

Crl.M.A.No.12178/2018

¶11

Allowed subject to just exceptions.

¶12

W.P.(Crl.) No.1976/2018

¶13

By the present petition, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.168/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Crime Against Women Cell, Nanak Pura on the complaint of respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.

¶14

Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on instructions submits that in the above noted FIR besides the four petitioners, father of petitioner No.1 Avtar Singh was also added as accused who has since passed W.P.(CRL) 1976/2018 page 1 of 3

¶15

away, thus now the four petitioners are the only accused and the respondent No.2 is the only complainant/victim.

¶16

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 before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts on 1^st May, 2017, copy whereof has been handed over in Court and is taken on record. She states that 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 ₹15 lakhs to respondent No.2 out of which she has already received a sum of ₹12 lakhs and the balance amount of ₹3 lakhs has been received by her today in Court vide Demand Draft No.001950 drawn on Axis Bank Ltd. She states that from the wedlock, a minor daughter namely Mankeerat Kaur was born on 13^th January, 2014 who will remain in the care and custody of the respondent No.2 and the petitioner would have visitation rights to meet the daughter once in a month at the nearby Gurudwara of the house of the complainant with prior intimation. 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 and undertakes to abide by the terms of settlement.

¶17

Petitioner No.1 who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel affirms the statement of respondent No.2 and undertake to abide by the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties. Petitioners W.P.(CRL) 1976/2018 page 2 of 3

¶18

No.2 to 4 are residents of UP and thus are exempted from appearing personally.

¶19

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 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.168/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Crime Against Women Cell, Nanak Pura and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed against all the petitioners.

¶21

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

¶22

Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

JULY 09, 2018

mamta

page 3 of 3

W.P.(CRL) 1976/2018

Surjeet Singh Gujral & Ors. v. the State ( NCT of Delhi)& Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surjeet Singh Gujral & Ors. v. the 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

Ramesh Bakshi Vs the State (Govt.of NCT of Delhi)& Anr.

Rakesh Kumar Vs State

Suich Industries Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Manjeet Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Hardeep Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

Manoj Kumar Gupta Vs State & Anr.

Ashok Singh @ Ashok Singh Khunga Vs State & Ors.

Shyam Ji Nigam Vs the State ( NCT of Delhi)

Hukam Chand Vs NCT of Delhi

Rakesh Kumar Vs State

Rohit Sehgal Vs Directorate of Enforcement New Delhi

Nitin Verma Vs State

Girija Dabas Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sandeep Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.