The petitioner sought quashing of a matrimonial FIR under various IPC sections. The Court noted the parties had settled via MOUs and pursued mutual divorce, leading it to quash the FIR and consequent proceedings as an exercise in futility. No prior case law is cited.
FIR No. 732/2015 and consequent proceedings are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~69
versus
STATE & ORS ..... Respondent Through : Mr Arun Kumar Sharma, Addl. PP for the State. W/SI Madhvi Bisht. Mr Himal Akhtar, Molvi Aijaz Hussain, Advocates for R-2 to 5.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R
% 06.02.2018 Crl. M.A. 2304/2018(exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 638/2018
CRL.M.C. 638/2018
Page 1
CRL.M.C. 638/2018
Page 2
IPC, Police Station Madhu Vihar and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
FEBRUARY 06, 2018 ‘Sn’
CRL.M.C. 638/2018
Page 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a matrimonial FIR colouring a Section 354-B IPC offence can be quashed when the parties have settled and seek to divorce by mutual consent.
5 provisions across 1 enactments
HARSH MEHTA & ORS.
STATE & ORS.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
