Full Text
Translation output
#49
% 04.08.2011
Present: Petitioner in person with Mr. Vikas Sharma, Advocate.
Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for the respondent No.1/State.
Investigating Officer Inspector Manoj Klumar, Traffic (TIPRG) in person.
Respondent No. 2 in person with Mr.R.S.Mala, Advocate.
+Cri.M.C. 1919/2011 & Cri.M.A. 6843/201
1,1 (sitay)
, I
I
Petitioner as well as the respondent No. 2 are identified by their respective counsels and the Investigating Officen Inspector Manoj Kumar, Traffic, TIPRG.
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.c.; seeking quashing of FIR
No.525/2003 under Sections 498A/406 IPC regist~red at P.S. Najafgarh on the complaint of the respondent No.2.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner t~at the FIR was the result of matrimonial discord, which has been amicablylsettled and now, there is no dispute left between the parties. Terms of settlement were reduced into writing and signed by both the petitioner and the respondent No. 2.
Learned counsel submits that since the parties hlave settled the matter, it would be a futile exercise to prosecute the petittioner on the basis of the complaint filed by the respondent No. 2, particularly when, the petitioner has clean antecedent and has no past history of criminal record.
Respondent No. 2 confirms having sign~d the memorandum of
' settlement annexed to the petition. She states lthat she has entered into settlement with the petitioner of her own accord without any inducement or duress. She states that as per the settlement, I she has obtained consent divorce from the petitioner. The petitioner has ~greed to pay her a sum of
2011:DHC:10789
~ 2.60 lakhs in full and final settlement of her claim for 'stridhan' and maintenance-present, past and future. She further states that she has already received ~ 80,000/- at the time of first motion, ~ 50,000!- at the time of decree of divorce and balam:e ~ 1,30,000/-, she has received today vide three Pay Orders i.e. Pay Orders No. 978150 dated 03.08.2011 for ~ 40,000/-, 978151 dated 03.08.2011 for ~ 45,000/- & 978149 dated
03.08.2011 for ~ 45,000/-, all drawn on UCO Bank, Patiala House, New Delhi. Respondent No. 2 further submits that now, there is no dispute left between her and the petitioner and therefore, she does not want any action against the petitioner on her FIR and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed.
Learned A.PP appearing for the State submits that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, State has no objection if the
FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
Since the parties have amicably settled the matter and now there is no dispute left, I feel that no fruitful purpose shall be served in prosecuting the petitioner on the basis of FIR. Accordingly, FIR NO. 525/2003 under Sections 498A/406 IPC registered at P.S. Najafgarh and the proceedings arising out of the same are. quashed.
Petition stands disposed of.
~
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
JUDGE
AUGUST 04, 2011
2011:DHC:10789
% 04.08.2011
Present: Petitioner in person with Mr. Vikas Sharma, Advocate.
Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for the respondent No.1/State.
Investigating Officer Inspector Manoj Klumar, Traffic (TIPRG) in person.
Respondent No. 2 in person with Mr.R.S.Mala, Advocate.
+Cri.M.C. 1919/2011 & Cri.M.A. 6843/201
1,1 (sitay)
, I
I
Petitioner as well as the respondent No. 2 are identified by their respective counsels and the Investigating Officen Inspector Manoj Kumar, Traffic, TIPRG.
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.c.; seeking quashing of FIR
No.525/2003 under Sections 498A/406 IPC regist~red at P.S. Najafgarh on the complaint of the respondent No.2.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner t~at the FIR was the result of matrimonial discord, which has been amicablylsettled and now, there is no dispute left between the parties. Terms of settlement were reduced into writing and signed by both the petitioner and the respondent No. 2.
Learned counsel submits that since the parties hlave settled the matter, it would be a futile exercise to prosecute the petittioner on the basis of the complaint filed by the respondent No. 2, particularly when, the petitioner has clean antecedent and has no past history of criminal record.
Respondent No. 2 confirms having sign~d the memorandum of
' settlement annexed to the petition. She states lthat she has entered into settlement with the petitioner of her own accord without any inducement or duress. She states that as per the settlement, I she has obtained consent divorce from the petitioner. The petitioner has ~greed to pay her a sum of
2011:DHC:10789
~ 2.60 lakhs in full and final settlement of her claim for 'stridhan' and maintenance-present, past and future. She further states that she has already received ~ 80,000/- at the time of first motion, ~ 50,000!- at the time of decree of divorce and balam:e ~ 1,30,000/-, she has received today vide three Pay Orders i.e. Pay Orders No. 978150 dated 03.08.2011 for ~ 40,000/-, 978151 dated 03.08.2011 for ~ 45,000/- & 978149 dated
03.08.2011 for ~ 45,000/-, all drawn on UCO Bank, Patiala House, New Delhi. Respondent No. 2 further submits that now, there is no dispute left between her and the petitioner and therefore, she does not want any action against the petitioner on her FIR and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed.
Learned A.PP appearing for the State submits that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, State has no objection if the
FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
Since the parties have amicably settled the matter and now there is no dispute left, I feel that no fruitful purpose shall be served in prosecuting the petitioner on the basis of FIR. Accordingly, FIR NO. 525/2003 under Sections 498A/406 IPC registered at P.S. Najafgarh and the proceedings arising out of the same are. quashed.
Petition stands disposed of.
~
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
JUDGE
AUGUST 04, 2011
2011:DHC:10789
JUDGMENT