Full Text
Translation output
'
[ r
#36
% 02.06.2011
Present: Petitioners in person with Mr.Kanwar Udai Bhan, Advocate, who identifies them.
Ms.Santosh Kohli, APP for the State/respondent No.1 along with
1.0. S.l. Mayank, P.S. Kapashera.
Respondent No.2 in person with Mr.Dhruv Mohan, Advocate, who identifies her.
+Cri.M.C. 1928/2011
This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.l08/2005 under Sections 406/498A/323/341/34 IPC registered at P.S. Kapashera, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2.
The ground for seeking quashing is that the FIR is the result of matrimonial discord which has been amicably settled and now there is no dispute left.
It is submitted that parties after the filing of FIR, have arrived at a
-~c,settlement and a Compromise Deed in this regard has been reduced into writing and signed by the parties. Copy of the Compromise Deed is placed on record.
Its correctness is verified by the parties and they have appended their signatures today on the copy of Compromise Deed.
Respondent No.2, who is identified by the Investigating Officer S.l.
Mayank, P.S. Kapashera, confirms that she has entered into settlement with the petitioners of her own accord, without any inducement or threat. She states
2011:DHC:11229
~~j
~- c_ that as per the terms of settlement, petitioners have agreed to pay her ~16 lacs in full and final settlement of her claims for alimony, stridhan and maintenance, past and future, out of which she has already received ~13.05 lacs and balance
~2.05 lacs she has received today in the form of an FDR in the name of her minor son Master Parth issued by Union Bank of India dated 11th May, 2011.
Respondent No.2 states that after the receipt of fixed deposit receipt, now there is no claim. She has already obtained divorce from petitioner No.1, as such, she does not wish the petitioners to be prosecuted on her FIR and she has no objection if the FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
Learned APP submits that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, State has no objection if the FIR and the proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.
Since the parties have amicably settled the matter and now there is no dispute left, I feel that no useful purpose shall be served in prosecuting the petitioners on the basis of the FIR. Accordingly, FIR No. 108/2005 under
, Sections 406/498A/323/341/34 IPC registered at P.S. Kapashera and the
L~-------
'-- proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.
Petition stands disposed of.
JUNE 02, 2011 ks
J:
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
JUDGE
2011:DHC:11229
[ r
#36
% 02.06.2011
Present: Petitioners in person with Mr.Kanwar Udai Bhan, Advocate, who identifies them.
Ms.Santosh Kohli, APP for the State/respondent No.1 along with
1.0. S.l. Mayank, P.S. Kapashera.
Respondent No.2 in person with Mr.Dhruv Mohan, Advocate, who identifies her.
+Cri.M.C. 1928/2011
This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.l08/2005 under Sections 406/498A/323/341/34 IPC registered at P.S. Kapashera, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2.
The ground for seeking quashing is that the FIR is the result of matrimonial discord which has been amicably settled and now there is no dispute left.
It is submitted that parties after the filing of FIR, have arrived at a
-~c,settlement and a Compromise Deed in this regard has been reduced into writing and signed by the parties. Copy of the Compromise Deed is placed on record.
Its correctness is verified by the parties and they have appended their signatures today on the copy of Compromise Deed.
Respondent No.2, who is identified by the Investigating Officer S.l.
Mayank, P.S. Kapashera, confirms that she has entered into settlement with the petitioners of her own accord, without any inducement or threat. She states
2011:DHC:11229
~~j
~- c_ that as per the terms of settlement, petitioners have agreed to pay her ~16 lacs in full and final settlement of her claims for alimony, stridhan and maintenance, past and future, out of which she has already received ~13.05 lacs and balance
~2.05 lacs she has received today in the form of an FDR in the name of her minor son Master Parth issued by Union Bank of India dated 11th May, 2011.
Respondent No.2 states that after the receipt of fixed deposit receipt, now there is no claim. She has already obtained divorce from petitioner No.1, as such, she does not wish the petitioners to be prosecuted on her FIR and she has no objection if the FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
Learned APP submits that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, State has no objection if the FIR and the proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.
Since the parties have amicably settled the matter and now there is no dispute left, I feel that no useful purpose shall be served in prosecuting the petitioners on the basis of the FIR. Accordingly, FIR No. 108/2005 under
, Sections 406/498A/323/341/34 IPC registered at P.S. Kapashera and the
L~-------
'-- proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.
Petition stands disposed of.
JUNE 02, 2011 ks
J:
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
JUDGE
2011:DHC:11229
JUDGMENT