Remanded

Ashok Sachdeva v. State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Delhi HC7 Feb 2018CRL.M.C./640/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous case involving matrimonial discord, the Delhi High Court, on a settlement between the divorced parties and the wife's request, quashed the FIR and proceedings against the petitioner, excluding a co-accused proclaimed offender.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 663/2007 and consequent proceedings under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC are quashed qua the applicant; order does not benefit accused Vijay Kumar.

Ashok Sachdeva Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~58

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 640/2018

¶4

ASHOK SACHDEVA ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through Mr. Pratyaksh Kumar, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Akshai Malik, APP for State. SI Satyawan, PS Uttam Nagar.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R % 07.02.2018

¶9

Crl.M.A. 2311/2018 (exemption)

¶10

Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶11

CRL.M.C. 640/2018

¶12

The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.663/2007 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Police Station Uttam Nagar.

¶13

The subject FIR was registered not only against the petitioner but also against one Suresh Kumar Sachdeva, Vijay Kumar and Santosh Sachdeva. Suresh Kumar Sachdeva has since expired. Santosh Sachdeva has not been charged and Ashok Sachdeva has been charged only under Section 406 IPC. The co-accused Vijay Kumar has been declared a proclaimed offender. The petitioner, who appears in person, submits that he has no knowledge about the

¶14

CRL.M.C. 640/2018

¶15

Page 1

¶16

whereabouts of Vijay Kumar and there is no contact between the family and Vijay Kumar.

¶17

The subject FIR emanates out of matrimonial discord. Petitioner was the husband of respondent No.2.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have settled their disputes through the settlement dated 21.02.2013 arrived at in Court. The parties have already been divorced by way of a decree of divorce by mutual consent, passed on 31.05.2015.

¶19

The respondent No.2 was to be paid a total sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in full and final settlement of all her claims. A sum of Rs.1,80,000/- has already been paid. The balance sum of Rs.20,000/has been paid to the respondent No.2 in cash in Court today.

¶20

The respondent No.2 is present in person and is identified by the Investigating Officer. She submits that she has settled her disputes with the petitioner and does not wish to press charges against the petitioner and prosecute the complaint any further.

¶21

In view of the fact that the proceedings emanate out of a matrimonial discord and the parties have fully and finally settled their disputes and the respondent No.2 has stated that she does not wish to press the complaint any further and the fact that the parties have already been divorced by way of a decree of divorce by mutual consent, passed on 31.05.2015, and in the interest of justice, it would be expedient to quash the subject FIR and the consequent proceedings

¶22

CRL.M.C. 640/2018

¶23

Page 2

¶24

emanating there from qua the petitioner.

¶25

In view of the above, FIR No.663/2007 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, Police Station Uttam Nagar and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are quashed, qua the petitioner.

¶26

It is clarified that this order shall not enure to the benefit of the accused Vijay Kumar who has already been declared as a proclaimed offender.

¶27

Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

¶28

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

¶29

FEBRUARY 07, 2018 st

¶30

CRL.M.C. 640/2018

¶31

Page 3

Ashok Sachdeva v. State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Sachdeva 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

Sunny Phogat Vs State NCT of Delhi

Gurupreet Singh Virk & Ors. Vs the State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Rohit Chawla & Ors. Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Shri Rohit & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Dlehi & Anr.

Atul Rathore & Ors. Vs State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Ors.

Directorate of Enforcement Vs Priyanka Mittal