SATNAM KAUR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a joint petition filed by the complainant as well as accused persons for quashing of proceedings arising out of the FIR No. 281/2004 under Sections 498A/323/354/328/376/34, IPC registered at Police Station Kanjhawala, New Delhi. The petitioner No. 1 is the complainant, petitioner No. 2 is her husband, petitioner No. 3 is father in law, petitioner No. 4 is mother in law and petitioner No. 5 is brother in law of the petitioner No. 1. The marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 was solemnized on 1.11.2004 as per Hindu (Sikh) rights and customs at Delhi.

(2.) THE FIR is lodged on 3.11.2004 (two days after the marriage) and is based on alleged occurrence which took place on 2.11.2004. It is clear that as per the allegations in the FIR, on the very next date after the marriage, the alleged occurrence took place which forced the petitioner No. 1 to lodge the complaint. It would, Therefore, be appropriate to reproduce here the relevant portion of the said complaint for better understanding of the nature of allegations made by the petitioner No. 1:

(3.) THE trial in the aforesaid FIR is pending before the learned ASJ, Delhi. At this stage, present joint petition is filed stating that parties have not been able live together due to their temperamental differences and due to indifferent attitudes and there is no cohabitation between them since 2.11.2004. It is also mentioned that with the intervention of the relatives and family members, the petitioner No. 1 and 2 agreed to dissolve the marriage by mutual consent and agreement dated 8.10.2005 was entered into between them settling all their matrimonial disputes amicably. Copy of this agreement is placed on record as per which the petitioner No. 2 agreed to give a sum of Rs. 90,000/ - to the petitioner No. 1. Rs. 20,000/ - was to be given at the time of signing the agreement and Rs. 70,000/ - was to be given in two Installments of Rs. 35,000/ - each at the time of making joint statement before the matrimonial Court in First and Second Motions for divorce by way of mutual consent. This amount has also since been paid. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 have also taken divorce from each other and orders in this behalf have been passed by the learned ADJ.