Full Text
CRL.M.C. 8/2018
SfflVAMWADHWA&ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Pankaj Talwar,Adv. versus, STATE OF DELHI & ANR Respondents
Through: Mr. Akshai Malik, Addl. PP for the State with SI Badami Lai
RAGHAVWADHWA&ORS Petitioners
Through: Mr. Pankaj Talwar, Adv.
Through: Mr. Akshai Malik, Addl. PP for the State with SI Badami Lai
NAZUK & ORS Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Adv.
Through: Mr. Mshai Malik, Addl. PP for the State with SI Jitender Singh
Mr. Pankaj Talwar, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person
2018:DHC:9303 v/1
15.01.2018
ORDER
1. Petitioners by these petitions being Crl. M.C. 8/2018, Crl. M.C.10/2018 & Crl. M.C. 22/2018 seek quashing of three FIRs being (i) FIR No. 1036 of 2015 under Sections 354/323/34 of the IPC, P.S. Maurya Enclave, Delhi; (ii) FIR No. 253 of 2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC, P.S. Subhash Place, Delhi; and (iii) FIR No. 1039 of 2015 under Sections 354/323/34 ofIPC, P.S. Miaurya Enclave, Delhi, respectively.
2. It is contended that the FIR was lodged consequent to a matrimonial discord. The parties who are present in person and represented by their counsel and also identified by the Investigating Officer contend that they have settled their disputes through the process of mediation held at Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini Courts, Delhi and a settlement agreement dated 24.03.2017 has been executedbetweenthe parties.
3. Petitioner no. 1 (husband) in Crl. M.C. 10/2018 and petitioner no. 1 (wife) in Crl. M.C. 22/2018 contend thatthey have dissolved their marriage by way of mutual consent and a decree of divorce by mutual consent has been passed on 28.11.2017.
4. The petitioner no. 1 (husband) in Crl. M.C. 10/2018 was to pay a sum of Rs. 6 lakhs to petitioner no. 1 (wife) in Crl. M.C. 22/2018. Today, a sumof Rs. 6 lakhs has beenhanded overto the petitioner (wife) in full and final settlement of all her claims as agreed in the settlement agreement dated 24.03.2017 by way of demand drafts bearing nos. 139005 & 139007 dated 11.12.2017 and 13.12.2017 respectively, in the sum ofRs. 3,00,000/each. The respective parties contend that they do notwish to press charges against eachotheras theyhaveamicably settled alltheirdisputes. CRL.M.C. 8/2018, 10/2018 & 22/2018 Page 2
5. Smt. Nazuk - Respondent no. 2 in Crl. M.C. 10/2018 who is petitioner no. 1 in Crl. M.C. 22/2018 is present in Court in person and is identified by the Investigating Officer submits that she is agreeable to the settlement and does not wish to press the present complaint(s) against the petitioners any further.
6. In view of the fact that the disputes between the parties emanated out of matrimonial discord and have been settled, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice beingthe ultimate guiding factor. It would also be expedient to quash the three FIRs and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.
7. In view of the above, the petitions are allowed. The three FIRs being (i) FIR No. 1036 of2015 under Sections 354/323/34 of the IPC, P.S. Maurya Enclave, Delhi; (ii) FIR No. 253 of 2016 under Sections 498A/406/34 ofIPC, P.S. SubhashPlace, Delhi;- and (iii) FIR No. 1039 of 2015 under Sections 354/323/34 of IPC, P.S. MauryaEnclave, Delhi in Crl. M.C. Nos. 8/2018, 10/2018 and 22/2018, and the consequent proceedmgs emanatingtherefromare accordingly quashed.
8. Order Dasti under signatures ofthe Court Master. sanj®:ev sachdeva, j knMe