AMAR NATH YADAV & ORS ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Rambir Chauhan, Advocate v. STATE&ANR

Delhi High Court · 05 Sep 2011 · 2011:DHC:9842
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALl; 0509.2011 Cd.; M.A. No.10456/2011 This is an application seeking exemption from filing the certified copies.; The application stands disposed of.; Cii. M.C. 2965/2011
2011:DHC:9842
criminal petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court quashed a criminal FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC in a matrimonial dispute following an amicable settlement and final divorce decree.

Full Text
Translation output
$"39 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 2965/2011
AMAR NATH YADAV & ORS ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Rambir Chauhan, Advocate
VERSUS
STATE&ANR Respondent
Through Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for the State Mr. T. S. Arya, Advocate for respondent no.2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALl
0509.2011 Cd.
M.A. No.10456/2011 This is an application seeking exemption from filing the certified copies.
Subject to the deficiency being rectified, the application is allowed.
The application stands disposed of.
Cii. M.C. 2965/2011
ORDER

3. This is a petition for quashing of FIR no.461/2006, under Section 2011:DHC:9842 498A/406/34 IPC registered by Police Station Timar Pur in respect of which trial is presently pending in the Court of Ms. Geetanjali, MM, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. The ground for quashing of the FIR is that the petitioner no. 3 Mr. Pramod © Babloo Yadav and respondent no.2 Smt. Savita have settled their matrimonial dispute. As per the terms of the settlement it has been agreed between the parties that an ex-parte decree of divorce which has been obtained by respondent no.2 against the petitioner no.3 in HMA Petition no. 597/2006 shall be treated as final and petitioner no.3 will not take any steps to revive the matter. It has also been observed that petitioner no.2 shall pay a sum of 1,80,000/- towards the full and final settlement of the claims of respondent no.2. The amount shall be paid in two installments. The first installment was paid on 05.08.2011 and second installment is being paid today in the Court. - 6. All the petitioners are present in the Court and have been duly identified by their counsel. The petitioners have also filed their separate affidavits in support of the averments made in the petition.

7. Two drafts for sum of 45,000/- have been handed over to respondent no.2, who is also present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel. She has also supported the averments made in the petition both orally as well as by filing an affidavit. She has stated that she has no objection in case the aforesaid FIR no.461/2006 which is pending before the learned trial court is quashed as she has been separated from petitioner no.3 by decree of divorce. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I feel that no useful purpose will be served by keeping of the FIR and the consequent proceedings pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate. Accordingly, FIR no.461/2006, under Section 498A/406/34 IPC registered by Police Station Timar Pur and the consequent proceedings which are pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate are quashed. No order of costs. V.K.SHALl,) SEPTEMBER 05, 2011 b