Full Text
Translation output
67#$-
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELifl AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2438/2011
ARUN PATHAK & ORS
Through:
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELifl AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2438/2011
ARUN PATHAK & ORS
Through:
VERSUS
..... Petitioners
Mr. Anurag Dubey, Advocate with
Petitiml.ers in person.
STATE & ANR ..... Respondents r
Through: Mr. C.L. Gupta, APP for the State · with SI Surender Sharma.
Mr. Pritam Singh, Advocate for the
Respondent No. 2 with Respondent
No. 2 in person.
Mr. Anurag Dubey, Advocate with
Petitiml.ers in person.
STATE & ANR ..... Respondents r
Through: Mr. C.L. Gupta, APP for the State · with SI Surender Sharma.
Mr. Pritam Singh, Advocate for the
Respondent No. 2 with Respondent
No. 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA,~UPTA
ORDER;
ORDER;
/o 29.07.2011
Crl. M~A. 8714/2011 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Crl. M1.C. No. 2438/2011
This is a petition for quashing of FIR No. 358/2006 under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS New Usmanpur, Delhi.
The complainant!Respondent No. 2 Ms. Lalita is present in person.
She states that the Petitioners and Respondent No.2/Complainant have entered into a Compromise. In terms ofthe 'settlement, marriage between the
Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2/Complainant has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. As full and final settlement of all the
CRL.M.C. 243812011
2011:DHC:10942 claims of1 the Respondent No. 2, the Petitioner No. 1 has to pay ~1.75 lakhs out of wHich ~1 lakh has already been paid to ber and ~75,000/- have been paid to h~:r: today in cash. She further states that in view of the settlement between the parties, she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
In view of the fad: that the parties have amicably resolved their differenqes of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful pl!lrpose will be seJ:]Ved in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
Cbnsequently, FIR No. 358/2006 under Sections 498A/406/34 IFC register~d at PS New Uslilanpur, Delhi and pr0ceedim.gs pursuant thereto are hereby 9uashed.
Rarties, who are identified by their respective counsels, have signed this or~er sheet in acknbwledgment of their statements made before tthis
Court.
The petition is disf>osed. Order dasti.
~~
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
Page2 of2
~'h
Crl. M~A. 8714/2011 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Crl. M1.C. No. 2438/2011
This is a petition for quashing of FIR No. 358/2006 under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS New Usmanpur, Delhi.
The complainant!Respondent No. 2 Ms. Lalita is present in person.
She states that the Petitioners and Respondent No.2/Complainant have entered into a Compromise. In terms ofthe 'settlement, marriage between the
Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2/Complainant has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. As full and final settlement of all the
CRL.M.C. 243812011
2011:DHC:10942 claims of1 the Respondent No. 2, the Petitioner No. 1 has to pay ~1.75 lakhs out of wHich ~1 lakh has already been paid to ber and ~75,000/- have been paid to h~:r: today in cash. She further states that in view of the settlement between the parties, she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
In view of the fad: that the parties have amicably resolved their differenqes of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful pl!lrpose will be seJ:]Ved in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
Cbnsequently, FIR No. 358/2006 under Sections 498A/406/34 IFC register~d at PS New Uslilanpur, Delhi and pr0ceedim.gs pursuant thereto are hereby 9uashed.
Rarties, who are identified by their respective counsels, have signed this or~er sheet in acknbwledgment of their statements made before tthis
Court.
The petition is disf>osed. Order dasti.
~~
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
Page2 of2
~'h
Yl
~1/ ( I~<:b I( (
""'~'fr"?
~~ i~\'{ ~~"'- )
~mfrl~11111
2011:DHC:10942
~1/ ( I~<:b I( (
""'~'fr"?
~~ i~\'{ ~~"'- )
~mfrl~11111
2011:DHC:10942
JUDGMENT