Full Text
Translation output
)
79# ^ HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 1625/2011
RAJIV KUMAR GUPTA @ RAJEEV KUMAR GUPTA Petitioner
Through: Dr. (Ms.) Vipin Gupta, Advocate with
Petitioner in person.
79# ^ HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 1625/2011
RAJIV KUMAR GUPTA @ RAJEEV KUMAR GUPTA Petitioner
Through: Dr. (Ms.) Vipin Gupta, Advocate with
Petitioner in person.
VERSUS
STATE OF (NCT) DELHI AND ANR Respondents
Through: Mr. Pawan Bahl, APP with SI Ram Niwas, CAW Cell, North East.
Respondent No. 2 in person.
Through: Mr. Pawan Bahl, APP with SI Ram Niwas, CAW Cell, North East.
Respondent No. 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
19.05.2011 Crl. M.A. Nos. 5965-66/2011 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Crl. M.C. 1625/2011 & Crl M.A. /2011 (Stay) (to be numbered)
By this petition the Petitioner and P.espondent No.2 seek quashing of
FIR No. 204/1995 under Sections 498A/406 IPG registered at PS Shahdara, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No. 2 against the Petitioner and
Complaint Case No. 27/2006 under Section 340 Cr.P.C. pending in the same
Court on the complaint of Petitioner against the Respondent No. 2 on the ground that the parties have amicably settled the matter.
CRL.M.C. 1625/2011 ^
2011:DHC:10510 Petitioner is present in person and is identified by his learned counsel and the Investigating Officer. He states that the parties have amicably resolved the matter. In terms of the settlement the parties have been granted divorce by mutual consent on 27"" April, 2011. Since the parties have amicably settled the matter he does not want to pursue the complaint case
No. 27/2006 under Section 340 Cr.P. C. filed by him against the Respondent
No. 2.
The complainant/Respondent No. 2 Ms. Anita Jain is present in person and is identified by the Investigation Officer. She states that the
Petitioner and Respondent No.2/Complainant have entered into a
Compromise. In terms ofthe settlement, marriage between the Petitioner and
Respondent No. 2/Complainant has been dissolved by adecree ofdivorce by mutual consent on 27'*' April, 2011. She states that she has no claim whatsoever left towards the Petitioner. 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 fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no usefdl purpose will be served in continuance ofthe proceedings, rather the
19.05.2011 Crl. M.A. Nos. 5965-66/2011 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Crl. M.C. 1625/2011 & Crl M.A. /2011 (Stay) (to be numbered)
By this petition the Petitioner and P.espondent No.2 seek quashing of
FIR No. 204/1995 under Sections 498A/406 IPG registered at PS Shahdara, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No. 2 against the Petitioner and
Complaint Case No. 27/2006 under Section 340 Cr.P.C. pending in the same
Court on the complaint of Petitioner against the Respondent No. 2 on the ground that the parties have amicably settled the matter.
CRL.M.C. 1625/2011 ^
2011:DHC:10510 Petitioner is present in person and is identified by his learned counsel and the Investigating Officer. He states that the parties have amicably resolved the matter. In terms of the settlement the parties have been granted divorce by mutual consent on 27"" April, 2011. Since the parties have amicably settled the matter he does not want to pursue the complaint case
No. 27/2006 under Section 340 Cr.P. C. filed by him against the Respondent
No. 2.
The complainant/Respondent No. 2 Ms. Anita Jain is present in person and is identified by the Investigation Officer. She states that the
Petitioner and Respondent No.2/Complainant have entered into a
Compromise. In terms ofthe settlement, marriage between the Petitioner and
Respondent No. 2/Complainant has been dissolved by adecree ofdivorce by mutual consent on 27'*' April, 2011. She states that she has no claim whatsoever left towards the Petitioner. 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 fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no usefdl purpose will be served in continuance ofthe proceedings, rather the
CRL.M.C. 1625/2011 P'lg® 2 of3 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.
Consequently, FIR No. 204/1995 under Sections 498A/406 IPG registered at PS Shahdara, Delhi and Complaint Case No. 27/2006 under
Section 340 Cr.P.C. pending in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate and proceedings pursuant thereto arehereby quashed.
Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements before this Court.
Thepetition andthepending application are disposed of
^MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MAY 19, 2011 vn Srnl. D/"^1.
Consequently, FIR No. 204/1995 under Sections 498A/406 IPG registered at PS Shahdara, Delhi and Complaint Case No. 27/2006 under
Section 340 Cr.P.C. pending in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate and proceedings pursuant thereto arehereby quashed.
Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements before this Court.
Thepetition andthepending application are disposed of
^MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MAY 19, 2011 vn Srnl. D/"^1.
CRJ..M.C. 1625/2011
M n fl ^ ,, T ^ n <9-^ 1)
Page 3 of3 i
M n fl ^ ,, T ^ n <9-^ 1)
Page 3 of3 i
JUDGMENT