Amit Bansal & Ors v. State & Anr

ORDER % • ^

24.10,2016 Crl.M^A.;Nos. 16488/2016 and 16494/2016(exemption) Exemptions allowed, subject to just exceptions: ; ' Crl.M.C.No. 3932/2016 and 3933/2016 Issue notice; Mr. Katyal, APP, accepts notice for the State. Respondent No.2, the complainarit/prosecutrix is, also present through her counsel. She is identifiedby the investigatingofficer. Mr. Anurag Ojha, proxy counsel for Mr. Saurabh Goel, Advocate for the respondentNo.2-complaiharitis also present aridwhose Vakalatnamahas also been filed, also identifies her. . The present petitions have been filed by the respective petitioners .to seek the quashing of FIR No, 556/2016 dated 29.07.2016 under Sections 376/354/406/498A/509/34 IPG registered at police station Narela, and the proceedings arising therefrom, the petitioner in Crl.M.C. no. 3932/2016 is the father of the complainant-respondent .No.2, whereas petitioners in Crl.M.C. No. 3933/2016 are the husband, father-in-law and mothfer-in-law of the comjplainant/respondentNo,2. Both the petitions relate the aforesaid FIR. They are premisedon/ memoranda* of understandingarrived at between the petitionersaccused and the respondentNo.2/complainant. Apart from the allegationsarisingout ofmatrimonialdisputesbetweenthe complainant/ respondent No.'2 and petitionerNo.1.in Crl.M.C, No. 3933/2016, other seriousallegations.weremade by the complainantagainsther own fatherand father-in-law,which relate to the invocationof Sections354 and 376^IPG. Respondent^0.2 is presentin courtand lookingto the natureofallegations. v; she was called to cumber and spoken td by the Court.. The complainant has - : ' confessed ihat, she was i.misled into making: serious and wild allegations , \ / against the petitioners in both these petitions at the instance of another " ' , person whose name has been diselosed in an affidavit giyen by her to the . investigatingofficer. She, is extremely re^etful abdut her conduct and ^ , ' • stated that she ha,d made the allegations oiit of her desperation in relation to • ; : the future'of herself and her children, on aecount of her living conditions , : ' - . .\and her husband's income.- • : ' . . ,' ' , Respondent No.2 jbins the prayer that the FIR in question and the prdeeedings arising thefe^fronibe quashed against all the-accused since she , hias realized her mistake; 'She has ente:red into a settlement and wishes to v , , withdraw her complainant out of her own volition,and without any coereion: - , ; or duress. She states tha.1 she is now livinghappilywith her husbandand , children-in a separate accommodationseparate from her in-laws ahd the ./ ' in case,theFIR andthe proceedings,arisingtherefromare not quashed. In view;of the aforesaid,Lam satisfiedthat ho useful purpose-would be S;ervedin^ontinuingwith the aforesaidFIR and,the proceedingsarising therefrom."Thesame are accdrdinglyquashed, , - ,/ Boththe petitionsstanddisposedof. ; - VIPIN SANGHI, J OCTOBER 2^ 2016 'siv • ':v ; • • ' ^- - r

$^48-49 \ -; * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +: CRL.M.C. 3933/201d'\- -v , ' - , , :; ^ - AMifBANSAL,&ORS! V ; ' , .....Petitioner ; Through: Mr. Neeraj Gupta,Advocate • -. / versus '• ' ~• T- , - STATE «&ANR:~ Through: +; CRL.M.C. 3932/2016 v , ' SURESHCHANDGUPTA; \ ^ - Through: , : ' ' ' versus - . : , . ..... Respondent Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP with ASI Prem Lata - Mr. .^urag Ojha, proxy, counsel for Mr. Saurabh, Gbel, Advocate, /for respondent,No.2 - ..... Petitioner Mr. Neeraj,Gupta, Advocate STATE&ANR.- V •• '/ • •; : ' . ' Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal,;APP with ASI Prem \ - •• •; Lata Mr. Apurag Ojha, proxy counsel for / - . , , , , Mr; Saurabh Goei, Advocate, for : respondent No.2 ' CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.