Deepak Verma & Ors v. State & Ors

ORDER %

27.09.2010

¶1The present is filed by petitioners under Section Cr.PC praying inter alia quashing of FIR No.784/2006, by the complainant/respondent No.2, wife of the petitioner No.l and his relatives, petitioner No.2 to 12 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered with Police Station: Nand Nagri, Delhi.

¶2At the outset, counsel states that the father of petitioner No.l, Shri Radhey Raman though impleaded as petitioner No.2 in the present petition, had expired on 08.08.2010. He hands over a death certificate dated

11.08.2010 in respect of petitioner No.2, issued by the Cantonment Board, Meerut Cantt. The same is taken on the record, Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

¶3Counsel states that the marriage petitioner No.l and the complainant/respondent No.2 was solemnized on 26.01.2004 at Delhi. From out of the wedlock, a female child was born, who is now five years' old. After the marriage, disputes and differences arose between parties, as a result of which, complainant/respondent aforesaid FIR. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed in the trial court and matter is stated to be pending at stage of prosecution evidence. In the meantime, the parties interacted each other directly through the good offices of their family members, relatives and well-wishers and have now arrived at a settlement.

¶4Counsel petitioners draws attention of this Court to para-2 present to indicate the terms and conditions of the settlement. He states that the petitioners agreed to pay a sum of Rs.1,70,000/- to the complainant/respondent in full and final settlement of all her claims against them. Out of the aforesaid amount, a sum of Rs.l lac was paid to the respondent No.2/complainant in two installments of Rs.50,000/- each. The balance sum of Rs.70,000/- is handed over to complainant/respondent through counsel today. It is further stated that the parties jointly filed an application for divorce by mutual consent, which was allowed by the learned ADJ vide judgment and decree dated 27.04.2010, copy of which is handed over by the counsel and taken on the record.

¶5The complainant/respondent No.2, who is present in Court and represented by her counsel, confirms the aforesaid position and affirms that the parties have arrived at a settlement and pursuant thereto, she has received a sum of Rs. 1,70,000/- in full and final settlement of all her claims against the petitioners. She further states that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, she does not want any further action to be taken on the aforesaid FIR.

¶6Learned APP State states that in view settlement arrived at between the parties, he has no objection to the prayer made in the present petition being allowed.

¶7This Court has heard counsels for the parties and perused the record and has also considered the submissions made by the parties. In view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement of their own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarters, useful purpose will be served by proceeding further aforesaid FIR and proceedings arising therefrom. CRL.M.C. 3082/2010 j

¶8Accordingly, prayer made in the is allowed. FIR No.784/2006 by the complainant/respondent Police Station: Nand Nagri, and all the proceedings arising therefrom stand quashed.

¶9The petition is disposed of. File be consigned to the record room. HIMA KOHLI,J SEPTEIVIBER 27, 2010 rkb ^

-Mt^ 45. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI \ + DEEPAK VERMA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: l^r. Kumar Nikhil, Advocate with all the petitioners in person except petitioner versus STATE & ORS Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for the State. Mr. J.B. Nagar, Advocate with respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI