Virender Sharma & Ors. v. State NCT of Delhi

1. This is a petition for quashing of FIR no. 78/2011[1], u/S 4 of Dowry

2. Prohibition Act registered by P.S. Bhajanpura in !respect of which the charge sheet has been filed in the competent Court of Magistrate at Karkardooma Court, Delhi. I The contention of the learned counsel for the pbtitioners is that the aforesaid FIR was registered against the peti~ioner nos.l to 3 on the basis of the complaint made by the petitioner no.4, who I happens to be the brother of one Kamal Sharma who was engaged with the petitioner no.l. It was alleged! that at the time of her engagement ceremony, they demanded dowry. The engagement ceremony is stated to have Jaken place on 20.1.2010 according to Hind.u rites. 1-r' L::.:. I ~~ L·_( I ·--;-·; i,------. ~:-! r" -- ' ~ I ~ !-, 2011:DHC:10693 ~ ~---; ·'-<-_'

3. Subsequent thereto, it is stated that onj 20.4.2011, a

4.

5. compromise deed was signed between the peti1ioner nos.[1] to 3 on one side and petitioner no.4 on behalf of the girl's family whereby all the outstanding disputes/differen~es were settled and the engagement ceremony was also cancelled as the matrimonial alliance could not materialize. The petition is supported by the affidavits of th~ petitioner no.1 as well as petitioner no.4 who is the complainajnt. Copy of the compromise deed has already been placed dn record. The affidavit of the girl who was engaged with the Jetitioner no.l is also on record. In all these affidavits, it has been stated that since the dispute has been settled and the parties have not marri~d, therefore, no

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the peti~ioners a well as

7. learned APP in response to the advance copy having been served. Having regard to the facts of the case, the parries have settled their disputes by a compromise deed, a copy or which is placed on record, no useful purpose would be server by proceeding ahead with the charge sheet, which is filed iljl the competent Court. ]>:..·- ·:- 1.-·~ I ~___( i I - I_ ~-C !:-! L-~ I: •',' ' ~ I i: L~ L i u~

8.

9. ~--·-· '-',/~ Accordingly, FIR no.?B/2011, u/S 4 of Dow[1] Prohibition Act registered by P.S. Bhajanpura and the conseqrnt proceedings which have been filed in the Court of learned MN[1] are quashed. Parties to bear their own costs.