Petitioner sought quashing of an FIR under dowry and cruelty charges. Respondent No.2 opposed settlement, claiming lack of residence rights and financial support, leading to dismissal.
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.
$~5
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Aman Saroha and Ms. Khusi, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
.....Respondents Through: Mr. Anand V. Khatri, ASC with SI Ravi Narwal P.S. Moti Nagar.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
O R D E R
% 16.07.2024 1. A Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed for quashing of FIR No.43/2017 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC filed by the petitioner on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding dated 30.10.2023 vide which the parties have agreed to reside together.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J
JULY 16, 2024/va
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/07/2024 at 14:09:02
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present petition for quashing of FIR No.43/2017 should be granted in the facts of the case.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohmd Sitare
The State Govt of NCT of Delhi
Neena Bansal Krishna
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
