Delhi High Court - Orders
Deepak Verma & Ors vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 21 January, 2022
Author: Subramonium Prasad
Bench: Subramonium Prasad
$~45
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 136/2022
DEEPAK VERMA & ORS. ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. U. A. Khan and Mr. S M Shah,
Advocates (Enrl.No.1260/2006) along
with petitioners - person (through
VC)
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Nandita Rao, ASC for the State
with ASI Usha, PS Mansarover Park.
Mr. Ashish Uppal, (Enrl. No.D/206
/2011) Advocate for the complainant
along with complainant - person
(through VC)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
ORDER
% 21.01.2022 HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING CRL.M.A. 1297/2022 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(CRL) 136/2022
1. The present petition under Article 226 Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing FIR No.45/2020 dated 13.02.2020, registered at Police Station Mansarovar Park for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC. The present FIR is an outcome of a matrimonial dispute between the parties.
Signature Not VerifiedW.P.(CRL) 136/2022 Page 1Signed Digitally of 4 By:RAHUL SINGH Signing Date:24.01.2022 16:31
2. The respondent No.2 is the complainant and the petitioner No.1 is the husband of the complainant.
3. The principal ground on which the petition is filed is that the parties have amicably settled their disputes. Parties state that in terms of the MoU/Settlement, the parties filed a petition being HMA No.637/2021 for divorce by mutual consent before the Judge, Family Court, Karkardooma Courts, Shahdara District, Delhi. By a judgment and decree dated 24.09.2021, the marriage between the complainant/respondent No.2 and the petitioner No.1/husband stands dissolved. It is further stated in the petition that under the MoU/Settlement, the petitioner No.1/husband has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the complainant/respondent No.2 towards the full and final settlement of all her claims, including Istridhan, dowry articles and maintenance (Past, Present and Future). Out of the said sum of Rs. 10,00,000/-, the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- to the complainant/respondent No.2 at the time of proceedings of first motion and a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- at the time of proceedings of the second motion, and the balance amount of Rs.5,00,000/- was to be paid during quashing of the FIR.
4. The complainant/respondent No.2 has also filed an affidavit (page No.57 of the paper book) affirming the fact that the claims and grievances of the complainant against the petitioners in the abovementioned FIR stands settled. It is also stated that the complainant does not have any objection if the FIR against the petitioners is quashed as she has already settled her claims due to her.
5. Today, the parties have joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing. The petitioners have been identified by their counsel - Mr. U. Signature Not Verified W.P.(CRL) 136/2022 Page 2Signed Digitally of 4 By:RAHUL SINGH Signing Date:24.01.2022 16:31 A. Khan, Advocate (Enrl.No.1260/2006) and the Investigating Officer, ASI Usha, PS Mansarover Park. The complainant/respondent No.2 has been identified by her counsel - Mr. Ashish Uppal, Advocate (Enrl. No.D/206/2011) and the Investigating Officer, ASI Usha, PS Mansarover Park. It is stated that the Demand Drafts bearing Nos. 827223 & 827224 dated 18.01.2022 of the balance amount for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs.2,50,000/- each) have been handed over to the complainant/respondent No.2. The complainant/respondent No.2 states that she has received the entire amount as per the MoU/Settlement and has settled all her matrimonial disputes with the petitioners out of her own free will, without pressure, coercion or undue influence and states that she does not want to pursue with the present case any further and request that the present FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom may be quashed. The parties undertake that they will remain bound by the terms of the MoU/Settlement arrived at between them and the proceedings recorded before this Court.
6. The parties, who have joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing today, understand the implication of the present proceedings. In view of the fact that the instant case is squarely covered by the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 and in view of the Settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the present proceedings. Resultantly, the FIR No.45/2020 dated 13.02.2020, registered at Police Station Mansarovar Park for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and the proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed. The parties shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement and the undertaking given to the Court.
Signature Not VerifiedW.P.(CRL) 136/2022 Page 3Signed Digitally of 4 By:RAHUL SINGH Signing Date:24.01.2022 16:31
7. The petition stands disposed of in above terms along with all the pending application(s), if any.
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J
JANUARY 21, 2022
S. Zakir
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 136/2022 Page 4Signed
Digitally of 4
By:RAHUL SINGH
Signing Date:24.01.2022
16:31