Delhi High Court - Orders
Abhay Sharma vs State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 1 September, 2022
Author: Anu Malhotra
Bench: Anu Malhotra
$~11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 & CRL.M.A.14268/2022
ABHAY SHARMA ..... Petitioner
Through: P-1 in person and P-2 through VC
with Mr. Vaibhav Sharma, Mr.
Ashish Tyagi & Mr. Parush Tyagi,
Advocates.
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for
State with Mr. Akshay Kumar & Mr.
Abhijeet Kumar, Advocates for R-1.
SI Savita Malik, Police Station Rani
Bagh.
R-2 in person through VC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
ORDER
% 01.09.2022
CRL.M.A.14268/2022
In terms of the order dated 06.05.2022, an application for
amendment of the memo of parties alongwith the amended memo of parties has been filed by the petitioner, the said memo of parties is allowed to be taken on record.
CRL.M.A.14268/2022 is disposed of accordingly. W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 The petitioner nos.1 & 2 named Abhay Sharma and Sudha Sharma, W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 Page 1 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.09.2022 14:42:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
vide the present petition seek the quashing of the FIR No.93/2020, Police Station Rani Bagh under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 submitting to the effect that a settlement has since been arrived at between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 vide a mediation settlement dated 15.02.2021 arrived at the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts, Delhi and pursuant thereto, the entire total settled sum of Rs.9,00,000/- has since been paid to the respondent no.2, that the marriage between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 has since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the HMA in HMA No.2238/2021 vide a decree dated 22.12.2021 of the Court of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, North-West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi and no useful purpose would be served by the continuation of the proceedings in relation to the FIR in question.
The Investigating Officer of the case is present and has identified the petitioner no.1 Abhay Sharma present in Court as well as the petitioner no.2 Sudha Sharma who has joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing as being the two accused arrayed in the FIR No.93/2020, Police Station Rani Bagh under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and has also identified the respondent no.2 Ms. Jyoti Tomar who has joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing as being the complainant thereof.
The respondent no.2 in her deposition on oath in replies to specific Court queries by the Court affirms having signed her affidavit dated 28.04.2022 as well as the settlement document dated 15.02.2021 arrived at between her and the petitioner no.1 at the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts, Delhi, qua which she states that she has signed both these W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 Page 2 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.09.2022 14:42:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
documents voluntarily of her own accord without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter and also affirms the factum of receipt of the total settled sum of Rs.9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs) from the petitioners and states that there are now no claims of hers left against the petitioners. The respondent no.2 also affirms the factum of dissolution of her marriage with the petitioner no.1 vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the HMA in HMA No.2238/2021 vide a decree dated 22.12.2021 of the Court of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, North- West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi and states that there is a child i.e. the minor daughter named Panya Sharma aged 9 years born of the wedlock between her and the petitioner no.1 who is in her custody. She further states that in view of the settlement arrived at between her and the petitioner no.1, she does not oppose the prayer made by the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 seeking the quashing of the FIR No.93/2020, Police Station Rani Bagh under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 nor does she want them to be punished in relation thereto.
As per the testimony of the respondent no.2 and also borne out from the record that there is a child i.e. a minor daughter born of the wedlock between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 who is in the custody of the respondent no.2.
In terms of the directions dated 06.05.2022, the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 have placed on record their respective affidavits for the protection of interest of the minor child born of the wedlock between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 and to similar effect is the testimony of the petitioner no.1 in replies to specific queries by the Court.
W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 Page 3 of 5Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.09.2022 14:42:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
On behalf of the State, the learned ASC does not oppose the prayer made by the petitioners seeking the quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties to the petition.
Taking into account the deposition of the respondent no.2 who has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer and the factum that the FIR has apparently emanated from a matrimonial discord which has since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent and there being no reason to disbelieve the statement made by the respondent no.2 that she has arrived at a settlement with the petitioners voluntarily of her own accord and taking into account the factum that the respondent no.2 states that she has understood the implications of the statement, she being well educated stated to be a practising lawyer, for maintenance of peace and harmony between the parties as well as for the well-being of the minor child born of the wedlock between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2, it is considered appropriate to put a quietus to the litigation between the parties qua the FIR in question.
In view thereof, the FIR No.93/2020, Police Station Rani Bagh under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against the petitioner nos.1 & 2 named Abhay Sharma and Sudha Sharma are thus quashed.
It is, however, made expressly clear that the quashing of the FIR in question shall not amount to any embargo on the minor child born of the wedlock between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 seeking her rights against the petitioners and the respondent no.2 for maintenance or otherwise in accordance with law in view of the verdict of the Hon'ble W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 Page 4 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.09.2022 14:42:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
Supreme Court in Civil Appeal 4031-4032/2019 arising out of SLP (C) Nos.32868-32869/2018 titled as Ganesh Vs. Sudhirkumar Shrivastava & Ors. vide the verdict dated 22.04.2019 as adhered to and followed by this Court in Rakesh Jain & Ors. vs. State & Anr. in CRL.M.C. 2935/2019 dated 06.09.2019.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
ANU MALHOTRA, J SEPTEMBER 1, 2022 nc W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 Page 5 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.09.2022 14:42:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI ITEM No.11 W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 ABHAY SHARMA versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.
01.09.2022 CW-1 SI Savita, PS Rani Bagh.
ON S.A. I am the Investigating Officer of FIR No.93/2020, Police Station Rani Bagh under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
There are two accused arrayed in the FIR. I identify the petitioner no.1 Abhay Sharma present today in Court and the petitioner no.2 Sudha Sharma who has joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing as being the two accused arrayed in the aforesaid FIR and I also identify the respondent no.2 Ms. Jyoti Tomar who has joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing as being the complainant thereof.
RO & AC ANU MALHOTRA, J
01.09.2022
Signature
Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:SUMIT GHAI
Signing
Date:07.09.2022
14:42:01
This file is
digitally signed by
PS to HMJ ANU
MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI ITEM No.11 W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 ABHAY SHARMA versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.
01.09.2022 CW-2 Ms. Jyoti Tomar, D/o Late Sh. R. P. Tomar, aged 34 years, R/o House No.468, Second Floor, Near Hari Mandir, Rishi Nagar, Delhi- 110034.
ON S.A. My affidavit dated 28.04.2022 and the settlement document dated 15.02.2021 between me and the petitioner no.1 at the Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts, Delhi bear my signatures thereon, which I have signed voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter. In terms of the said settlement dated 15.02.2021 arrived at between me and the petitioner no.1, I have received the total settled sum of Rs.9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs) from the petitioners. There are now no claims of mine left against the petitioners.
The marriage between me and the petitioner no.1 has since been dissolved vide a decree of divorce through mutual consent under Section 13B(2) of the HMA in HMA No.2238/2021 vide a decree dated 22.12.2021 of the Court of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, North-West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi. There is a child i.e. the minor daughter named Panya Sharma aged 9 years born of the wedlock between me and the petitioner no.1 who is in my custody.
In view of the settlement arrived at between me and the petitioner Signature no.1, I do not oppose the prayer made by the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 seeking Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:07.09.2022 14:42:01 This file is digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
the quashing of the FIR No.93/2020, Police Station Rani Bagh under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 nor do I want them to be punished in relation thereto.
I am a practising lawyer.
I have made my statement after understanding its implications thereof voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, coercions or pressure from any quarter and I do not need to think again.
RO & AC ANU MALHOTRA, J
01.09.2022
Signature
Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:SUMIT GHAI
Signing
Date:07.09.2022
14:42:01
This file is
digitally signed by
PS to HMJ ANU
MALHOTRA.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI ITEM No.11 W.P.(CRL) 1028/2022 ABHAY SHARMA versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.
01.09.2022 CW-3 Mr. Abhay Sharma, S/o Sh. Kailash Chand Sharma, aged 35 years, R/o HIG 26, Ram Ganga Vihar, Phase-II, Moradabad, U.P. - 244001.
ON S.A. My affidavit dated 14.07.2022 bears my signatures thereon, which I have signed voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter. There is a minor daughter named Panya Sharma born of the wedlock between me and the respondent no.2 and the said child is in the custody of the respondent no.2.
I undertake to adhere to the terms of my affidavit dated 14.07.2022 for protection of interest of the minor child.
I have made my statement after understanding its implications thereof voluntarily of my own accord without any duress, coercions or pressure from any quarter and I do not need to think again.
RO & AC ANU MALHOTRA, J
01.09.2022
Signature
Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:SUMIT GHAI
Signing
Date:07.09.2022
14:42:01
This file is
digitally signed by
PS to HMJ ANU
MALHOTRA.