Allowed

Naveen & Ors. v. State & Anr.

Delhi HC22 Mar 2018W.P.(CRL)/852/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of an FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC alleging matrimonial discord. The Court found that parties had settled the matter amicably at the Delhi Mediation Centre, with the complainant receiving full claims via a demand draft and mutual divorce granted. Consequently, the FIR and proceedings were quashed.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 192/2016 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and proceedings pursuant thereto were quashed.

Naveen & Ors. Vs State & Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~51

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 852/2018

¶4

NAVEEN & ORS. ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. M.K. Sharma, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE & ANR.

¶7

..... Respondent Represented by: Ms. Kamna Vohra, ASC with WASI Babita PS Nabi Karim. Mr. Surender Kumar, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶9

O R D E R % 22.03.2018

¶10

Crl.M.A. 5318/2018

¶11

Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

¶12

W.P.(CRL) 852/2018

¶13

By the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 192/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Nabi Karim, Delhi 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 from Investigating Officer submits that in the above-noted FIR the 3 petitioners are the only accused and respondent No.2 the only complainant/ victim.

¶15

W.P.(CRL) 852/2018 page 1 of 3

¶16

Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel and the Investigating Officer. Respondent No.2 states that she has settled the matter with the Petitioners before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts on 8^th December, 2016 where after divorce by mutual consent has been granted between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2. In lieu of all her claims of maintenance, istridhan, alimony, etc., respondent No.2 is to receive a sum of ₹3,50,000/- out of which she has already received ₹3 lakhs and the balance amount of ₹50,000/- has been received by her today in Court by way of demand draft No. ‘701315’ drawn on Corporation Bank. She states that she has now no claim whatsoever against the petitioners and the minor child Cheenu born from the wedlock of the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 will remain in her care and custody and the petitioners will not have the visiting rights of the child, though inadvertently in the terms of the settlement before the Delhi Mediation Centre it has been mentioned that petitioner No.1 would have the visiting rights.

¶17

Petitioners No.1 and 3 are present in Court and are identified by the learned counsel. They affirm the statement of respondent No.2. Petitioners also state that they would not be entitled to the custody or the visiting rights of the minor child baby Cheenu and undertake to abide by the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶18

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 W.P.(CRL) 852/2018 page 2 of 3

¶19

pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

¶20

Consequently, FIR No. 192/2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS Nabi Karim, Delhi 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

MARCH 22, 2018 ‘ga’

¶25

page 3 of 3

¶26

W.P.(CRL) 852/2018

Naveen & Ors. v. State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen & Ors. v. State & 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

Muslim Vs State

Dharambir Vs the Statr of NCT of Delhi

Baker Street through Its Director Rohit Agarwal Vs Sdmc & Ors.

Virender Saxena & Anr. Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Ramesh Vs State

Yashpal @ Mukesh @ Chattoo Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Rohit Sehrawat Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Hitachi Payment Services (P) Ltd. Vs NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Muslim Vs State

Gangu Vs the State

Rajesh Kumar Vs Rajendra Kakkar

Shamshad & Ors. Vs the State & Anr.

Jitender Birmani & Ors. Vs the State & Anr.

Vikas Mittal & Ors. Vs the State ( Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.