Full Text
Translation output
( ..
-
#3
% 25.05.2011
Present: Petitioners in person with Mr.Mukesh Kaushik, Advocate, who identifies them.
Ms.Santosh Kohli, APP for the State/respondent No.1 with 10 51 Ram
Niwas, P.S. CAW Cell, North East.
Respondent No. 2 in person with Ms. Sweta Gael, Advocate, who identifies her.
+Cri.M.C.790/2011
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR
-,~ No.20/2006 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC r/w Section 3/4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act registered at P.S.Mansarovar Park on the complaint of the respondent No.2.
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 between them. Compromise deed bearing the signatures of petitioner No. 1 as well as the respondent No. 2 is placed on record .
.. It is submitted that the parties have amicably settled the matter and as per the terms of settlement, petitioners have agreed to pay a sum of ~
40,000/- to respondent No. 2 in full and final settlement of her claim for maintenance-present, past and future including alimony etc. and now, there is no dispute left between them.
Respondent No. 2, who is identified by her counsel Ms. Sweta Gael, Advocate as well as 10 51 Ram Niwas, P.S. CAW Cell confirms that she has entered into the settlement with the petitioners of her own accord without
2011:DHC:10369 any inducement or threat and pursuant to the settlement, she has received
Rs. 40,000/- today from the petitioners in full and final settlement of her claim. She states that she has obtained consent divorce. Respondent No. 2 further states that now, there is no dispute left between her and the petitioners and therefore, she does not want the petitioners to be prosecuted on her FIR and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed.
Learned APP appearing for the State submits that in view of the
-
--'-...., settlement arrived 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 useful purpose shall be served in prosecuting the petitioners on the basis of instant FIR. Accordingly, FIR No. 20/2006 under
Sections 498A/406/34 IPC r/w Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered at P.S.Mansarovar Park and the proceedings arising out of the same are quashed .
.., Petition stands disposed of.
~
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
JUDGE
MAY 25, 2011 akb
2011:DHC:10369
-
#3
% 25.05.2011
Present: Petitioners in person with Mr.Mukesh Kaushik, Advocate, who identifies them.
Ms.Santosh Kohli, APP for the State/respondent No.1 with 10 51 Ram
Niwas, P.S. CAW Cell, North East.
Respondent No. 2 in person with Ms. Sweta Gael, Advocate, who identifies her.
+Cri.M.C.790/2011
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR
-,~ No.20/2006 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC r/w Section 3/4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act registered at P.S.Mansarovar Park on the complaint of the respondent No.2.
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 between them. Compromise deed bearing the signatures of petitioner No. 1 as well as the respondent No. 2 is placed on record .
.. It is submitted that the parties have amicably settled the matter and as per the terms of settlement, petitioners have agreed to pay a sum of ~
40,000/- to respondent No. 2 in full and final settlement of her claim for maintenance-present, past and future including alimony etc. and now, there is no dispute left between them.
Respondent No. 2, who is identified by her counsel Ms. Sweta Gael, Advocate as well as 10 51 Ram Niwas, P.S. CAW Cell confirms that she has entered into the settlement with the petitioners of her own accord without
2011:DHC:10369 any inducement or threat and pursuant to the settlement, she has received
Rs. 40,000/- today from the petitioners in full and final settlement of her claim. She states that she has obtained consent divorce. Respondent No. 2 further states that now, there is no dispute left between her and the petitioners and therefore, she does not want the petitioners to be prosecuted on her FIR and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed.
Learned APP appearing for the State submits that in view of the
-
--'-...., settlement arrived 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 useful purpose shall be served in prosecuting the petitioners on the basis of instant FIR. Accordingly, FIR No. 20/2006 under
Sections 498A/406/34 IPC r/w Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered at P.S.Mansarovar Park and the proceedings arising out of the same are quashed .
.., Petition stands disposed of.
~
(AJIT BHARIHOKE)
JUDGE
MAY 25, 2011 akb
2011:DHC:10369
JUDGMENT