Quashed

Rohit Chopra & Ors. v. the Stae & Anr.

Delhi HC12 Apr 2018W.P.(CRL)/211/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed FIR No. 544/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and related proceedings upon obtaining a recorded settlement between the parties, where the marriage was dissolved by mutual consent and all claims were settled. The order reasons that continuation would create acrimony and no useful purpose would be served.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 544/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and proceedings pursuant thereto are quashed.

Rohit Chopra & Ors. Vs the Stae & Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(CRL) 211/2018 ROHIT CHOPRA & ORS ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Ritesh Oberoi, Advocate.

¶4

versus
THE STAE & ANR Represented by:	..... Respondents Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel with Mr. Anuj Jain and Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Advocates with SI Sunil
	Chand, SI Suresh Ahlawat, PS
	Moti Nagar.
	Ms. Sakshi Bhayana, Advocate
	for respondent No. 2.

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶6

O R D E R % 12.04.2018

¶7

By the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 544/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Moti Nagar, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel for the State on instructions submits that in the above noted FIR the five petitioners are the only accused and the respondent No.2 is the only complainant/ victim.

¶9

Respondent No. 2 who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel and Investigating Officer states that she has settled the W.P.(CRL) 211/2018 page 1 of 3

¶10

matter with the petitioners terms whereof are recorded in their statements for the divorce by mutual consent. 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 her claims, that is, maintenance, streedhan and alimony etc. Petitioner No.1 has to pay a sum of ₹12 lakhs to respondent No.2 out of which she has already received a sum of ₹8 lakhs and the balance amount of ₹4 lakhs has been received by her today in Court vide Demand Draft Nos. 009469 and 009470 drawn on HDFC Bank. She further states that she has now 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.

¶11

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

¶12

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.

¶13

Consequently, FIR No. 544/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Moti Nagar, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.

¶14

W.P.(CRL) 211/2018

¶15

page 2 of 3

¶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

APRIL 12, 2018 ‘yo’

¶20

W.P.(CRL) 211/2018

¶21

page 3 of 3

Rohit Chopra & Ors. v. the Stae & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Chopra & Ors. v. the Stae & 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

Kailash Shankar & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Aarti Nishad @ Aarti Balkrishana & Anr. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Jyoti Ahirwar & Anr. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Vikas Vs State

Sumit Singh Rawat & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Abdul Jabbar Ali & Ors. Vs the State & Anr.

Anand Sharma Vs State NCT of Delhi

Pooja Kalra Vs Addl Director of Revenu Intelligence

Kailash Shankar & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Aarti Nishad @ Aarti Balkrishana & Anr. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Babloo Tiwari Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Piyush Chopra Vs the State & Anr.

Ahmed Shoukeen Vs State

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