Jasdeep Singh & Ors v. State & Anr

ORDER %

25.11.2010

¶1The present petition is filed by petitioners under Section of the Cr.PC praying inter alia for quashing of FIR No.67/2010, lodged by respondent No.2, wife of petitioner No.l and daughter-in-law of petitioners No.2 and 3 under Sections 323/324/34 IPC, registered with Police Station: Rajouri Garden, Delhi.

¶2Counsel for the petitioners states that the marriage of the petitioner No.l and respondent was solemnized on ^

20.12.2009. There is no child born from out of the wedlock. The parties are stated to have separated in March, 2010. This was followed by lodging of aforesaid FIR by No.2/complainant. On 27.04.2010, petitioner No.l filed a divorce CRL.M.C. 3462/2010 Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. petition against respondent No.2, which was pending. However, in the meantime, parties arrived at a settlement as recorded in the I Compromise Deed dated 28.07.2010 (Annexure P-3). It is stated by the counsel for the petitioners that in terms of the settlement, petitioner No.l has agreed to pay a sum of ?15 lacs to respondent No.2/complainant in full and final settlement of all her claims against the petitioner|^^^utof the aforesaid amount, a sum of ?4 lacs has already been paid to respondent No.2/complainant. Today, a pay order for ?3 lacs. bearing No.422767 dated

06.11.2010 drawn on Indian Overseas Bank, Rajouri Garden, Delhi, is handed over to through counsel. It is agreed between the parties that the balance sum of ^8 lacs shall be paid to respondent in two installments, i.e., ?2 lacs shall be paid at the * time of filing of the first motion for divorce by mutual consent and ?6 lacs at the time of filing of the second motion. It is, therefore, prayed '\ that the present FIR may be quashed.

¶3Respondent is present in Court and represented by her counsel. She confirms the aforesaid position and states that a settlement has been arrived at with the petitioner of her own free will and volition and without any undue influence or CRL.M.C. 3462/2010 coercion from any quarters and tiiat she has no objection to the FIR being quashed.

¶4Learned APP for the State submits that after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and the matter is pending trial. However, in view of the settlement arrived at between parties, he has no objection to the prayer made in the present petition being allowed.

¶5This Court has heard counsels for the parties. In view of the submission made by respondent and in view of fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement of their own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarters, useful purpose will be served by proceeding further with the aforesaid FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom.

¶6Accordingly, the prayer made in the petition is allowed. FIR No.67/2010, lodged by with Police Station: Rajouri Garden, Delhi, and all proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. ^

¶7The petition is disposed of alongwith the pending application. File be consigned to the record room. HIMA KOHLI,J NOVEMBER 25, 2010 rkb CRLIVI.C. 3462/2010 / {

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ^ + CRL.M.C. 3462/2010 and CrLM.A. 17065/2010 JASDEEP SINGH & ORS Petitioners Through: Mr. IMukesh Sharma, Advocate with ' petitioners No.l to 3 in person. versus STATE & ANR Respondents Through: i^lr. i^.N. Dudeja, APP for the State l^r. Azhar Qayum, Advocate with respondent in person. CORAIvi: HON'BLE IvjS. JUSTICE HIIVIA KOHLI