Allowed

Surendra@ Sulendra@ Surender and Ors. v. State(Nct of Delhi) and Anr.

Delhi HC11 Feb 2019CRL.M.C./337/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court quashed FIR and proceedings under IPC sections 498-A/406/34 and DP Act sections 4/5. Parties settled disputes voluntarily and marriage dissolved by consent decree. Petitioners paid remaining settlement amount in court, leading to quashing in interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.946/2015 and proceedings thereunder under sections 498-A/406/34 IPC and sections 4, 5 DP Act quashed.

Surendra@ Sulendra@ Surender and Ors. Vs State(Nct of Delhi)… — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 337/2019

¶4

SURENDRA@ SULENDRA@ SURENDER AND ORS .... Petitioners Through: Mr. Santosh Kumar Sahu, Advocate

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE(NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR .... Respondents Through: Mr. Kamal Kumar Ghai, APP with SI Ashwani, PS:Jyoti Nagar, Delhi Mr. S.P. Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

¶9

O R D E R % 11.02.2019

¶10

CRL.M.A.1457/2019

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of.

¶12

CRL.M.C. 337/2019

¶13

The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.946/2015, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Sections 4 and 5 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (‘DP Act’), registered at P.S.: Jyoti Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶14

The petitioners and respondent No.2 as well as their respective counsel submitted that the parties have settled their disputes on their own free will, without any force or coercion, vide Settlement dated 8.10.2016 before the Counselling Cell, Family Court Karkardooma, Shahdara, Delhi, in terms whereof the petitioner No.1 had to pay Rs.5,00,000/- to the respondent No.2. It is further submitted that out of Rs.5,00,000/-, an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- has already been paid to respondent No.2. It is also submitted that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has been dissolved by mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 vide a decree of divorce dated 16.3.2018.

¶15

Respondent No.2, who is present in Court along with her father, has reiterated the aforesaid facts and submitted that she has no objection to the petition being allowed and the FIR being quashed in case the petitioner pays the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- to her, which is required to be paid as per the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have brought a demand draft bearing No.197625, dated 15.11.2018, drawn on Central Bank of India, for an amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, which has been handed over to the respondent No.2 today in the Court.

¶17

The Investigating Officer (‘IO’), who is present in Court, has identified the petitioners as well as respondent No.2 and has

¶18

also verified the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶19

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the settlement arrived at between the parties and the dissolution of marriage, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the parties entangled in the criminal proceedings. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, FIR No. 946/2015, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 5 of the DP Act, registered at P.S.: Jyoti Nagar, Delhi are quashed.

¶20

7. Petition is disposed of in above terms.

¶21

CHANDER SHEKHAR, J

¶22

FEBRUARY 11, 2019 tp

Surendra@ Sulendra@ Surender and Ors. v. State(Nct of Delhi) and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra@ Sulendra@ Surender and Ors. v. State(Nct of Delhi) and 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

Vasudev Juneja & Ors. Vs State & Anr.

Manoj Kumar Vs State ( NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Krishan Meghwal Vs State ( Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Mohd. Rizwan and Anr. Vs the State and Anr.

Arun Kumar & Ors. Vs State & Anr.

Omway Build Estate Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Satyendra Jain